Want to really set the fox among the hens? Demand a thorough review of what SCOTUS decided in Marbury v Madison (1789).
There is no place in the Constitution that explicitly gives SCOTUS the function of deciding if a law is constitutional or not.
The Tenth Amendment, which reads
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
would seem to indicate that absent any explicit delegation of that power to SCOTUS it doesn't have the power to do so.
They just effectively said "In our opinion this needs to be done, nobody is doing it, so we will just assume the power to do so."
Want to really set the fox among the hens? Demand a thorough review of what SCOTUS decided in Marbury v Madison (1789).
ReplyDeleteThere is no place in the Constitution that explicitly gives SCOTUS the function of deciding if a law is constitutional or not.
The Tenth Amendment, which reads
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
would seem to indicate that absent any explicit delegation of that power to SCOTUS it doesn't have the power to do so.
They just effectively said "In our opinion this needs to be done, nobody is doing it, so we will just assume the power to do so."
"I like judicial impeachment even better."
ReplyDeleteExactly!