Congress Seeks Authority to Overturn Supreme Court Decisions

Talon News ^ | 04/16/04 | Jimmy Moore

[coffeebreak]

WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- Rep. Ron Lewis (R-KY) has offered legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives that would allow Congress to overturn future U.S. Supreme Court decisions by a super majority vote.

"The Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act," or H.R. 3920, would give Congress permission to override certain U.S. Supreme Court rulings if two-thirds of both houses of Congress vote for it.

Lewis said he drafted this legislation to combat the activist judges who have been "legislating from the bench" in recent years.

"America's judicial branch has become increasingly overreaching and disconnected from the values of everyday Americans," Lewis observed in a statement.

Lewis states the judiciary has ceased interpreting the law and is now making law.

"The recent actions taken by courts in Massachusetts and elsewhere are demonstrative of a single branch of government taking upon itself the singular ability to legislate," Lewis continued, referring to the controversial ruling issued by the Massachusetts Supreme Court late last year that legalizes gay marriage in that state beginning next month.

"These actions usurp the will of the governed by allowing a select few to conclusively rule on issues that are radically reshaping our nation's traditions," Lewis concluded.

Restoring a proper amount of checks and balances is the key to this legislation, Lewis added.

This legislation would be limited to rulings dealing with the constitutionality of bills passed by Congress only.

Yet, Lewis said the American people deserve to have their representatives in Congress decide for them whether or not a judicial ruling is right or not.

"The framers of the Constitution were advocates of serious debate who believed that the deliberation of the political process should always be open to the people," Lewis expressed. "As the courts continue to expand their power of judicial review, I believe Congress, as the people's branch of representative government, should take steps to equally affirm our authority to interpret constitutional issues."

Referring to the historic 1803 U.S. Supreme Court decision Marbury v. Madison, Lewis said the U.S. Constitution does not allow the right judicial review because it would threaten the equality of the three branches of government.

"As judicial power expands, Congressional power contracts," Lewis revealed. "This is especially true when the power to interpret the Constitution rests in the hands of activist judges anxious to find the latest 'right' hiding between the lines of our founding document."

"The Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act" has 22 co-sponsors and is currently under consideration in the House Judiciary Committee as well as the House Rules Committee.

[undeniable logic]

I don't get it - the proposal is that congress can overturn supreme court decisions with a supermajority. Doesn't congress already have all the power that it needs. If the supreme court is correctly interpreting the constitution, then an ammendment is necessary (if an outcome not supported by the supermajority is reached.) If the supreme court consistently misinterprets the constitution, then a judge can be impeached and removed by supermajority (isn't this correct)?

[FreeAtlanta]

I would support an amendment in this regard, however, I would want it to be more like a super super majority of about 80%.

[Walkingfeather]

IF congress wants to impeach a activist judge they can by super majority.... you havent thought it through. You want Ginsberg,Kennedy, souter gone? IMPEACH THEM. Rule #1 use the tools that you have in your posession don't reinvent the wheel.

[Budge]

Ping!

[Budge]

Lewis states the judiciary has ceased interpreting the law and is now making law.

Someone in D.C. finally notices what We The People have been saying for for years!

[Budge]

All they have to do is impeach the activists on the 9th Circuit Court (the most overturned court in the history of the world and they are just begging for it) and you would see judicial circumspection flower across the land.

Agreed - - but, do you see this ever happening?

Lord knows they have had plenty of chances to do this, and not just the 9th in California, but everywhere.

[steplock]

"Something MUST be done..."

That is why we have the Bill of Rights - starting with the First Amendment Right to Political Speech - and the Second Amendment in case our "reprehensible representative lawyer/politican/judges" refuse to listen.

That is why they are so adamant in stealing our right to bear arms --- they are the reason for the amendment!

[steplock]

Don't worry about the "gotcha weenies" on this board - they live only to show superiority that they read EVERYTHING and NEVER miss anything!

Good articles deserve reposting for those of us that do not live on this board.

[Mikey]

"The great object of my fear is the federal judiciary. That body, like gravity, ever acting, with noiseless foot, and unalarming advance, gaining ground step by step, and holding what it gains, is engulfing insidiously the special governments into the jaws of that which feeds them. ... It has long, however, been my opinion, and I have never shrunk from its expression...that the germ of dissolution of our federal government is in the constitution of the federal Judiciary; ...working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped. ... The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working under ground to undermine the foundations of our confederated fabric. They are construing our Constitution from a coordination of a general and special government to a general and supreme one alone."

--Thomas Jefferson

[Sandy]

This legislation is absurd. When was the last time that Congress passed a good Constitutional law that ended up being struck down by the Supreme Court? I can't think of an instance right off the top of my head. Where are people getting the idea that Congress would be passing all sorts of wonderful laws were it not for the SCOTUS standing in the way? The notion is frankly quite laughable. Give Congress free rein to do whatever it wants, and you can kiss this Republic goodbye. Count on it.

[TheBattman]

Of course, even if this were to come to pass - it would wind up in a vicious circle - as some court would overturn the law....

[TheBattman]

I believe the constitution does, in fact, give limiting power over the courts to the legislature. This is all part of the ballance of power that our form of government is SUPPOSE to abide by. Unfortunately the courts have decided that they are the "Kings" of the country...

[Valpal1]

I have hope. I think the gay marriage issue has enraged and educated the silent majority. We may yet see voters sending a clear message to congress to grow some nads and do what is right.

In the mean time I harangue my rep and senators regularly about the need to reign in the judiciary with an impeachment or two.