[WBurgVACon]

Read "Men in Black" by Mark Levin....it will infuriate you, but it is an excellent source of information on Judicial Tyranny.

[general_re]

Dred Scott, like all Supreme Court decisions, could not have been overturned by either legislation or executive order. Dred Scott was overturned by the 13'th Amendment, although you could argue that it was effectively overturned at a little courthouse in Appomatox, Virginia.

[mike182d]

It was a War that overturned it, I thought... :-)

[Defiant]

The Supreme Court sometimes overturns its own decisions. Plessy v. Ferguson (circa 1898) was overturned by Brown v. Board of Education (1954).

The Ga. Sodomy case was overturned last year. The juvenile death penalty case was overturned this year.

Examples of legislative type responses to judicial decisions include:

The cases that would have prevented an income tax were overturned by the 16th Amendment. Nowadays, you wouldn't need that amendment, but back then, they thought they needed it.

The cases that prevented labor unions (I believe based on freedom of contract) were overturned by legislation and later courts.

The cases that allowed monopolies were overturned by Teddy Roosevelt's antitrust laws.

[PAR35]

Based upon your question, I would suggest that you start by reading the U.S. Constitution and then Marbury v. Madison (5 U.S. 137 (1803). Then look at the history of the Commerce Clause and how political pressure forced the SCOTUS to reverse itself on that issue. As general_re noted, an executive order or a statute can't overturn a Constitutional interpretation by the Supremes. Of course, not all Supreme Court decisions are made on constitutional grounds.