Posted on 05/27/2004 6:34:10 PM PDT by wagglebee
Congress could create a special court to deal with marriage and they could limit appellate review of that court by the USSC.
However, Congress cannot shield their acts from some form of judicial review.
Ever since Brown v. Board, this country's been headed for a constitutional crisis. Eventually, an executive (gov. or pres.) is going to refuse to comply with the order of a federal court. And when that happens, it's going to be a dark day in America, because the loss of prestige of the judiciary will spread far beyond the case in question. But if no one ever faces down the courts, popular rule will be dead.
Why would they need to do even that? All they would have to do is remove from all federal courts the power to deal with matters of same-sex marriage. Problem solved.
If it was, then your concealed carry permit from Florida would be valid in New York, and your marriage to your first cousin in Florida would be recognized in Kentucky.
Neither case is true
Actually it started with Marbury v. Madison. Nothing in the Constitution implies that the courts are the arbiters of what is and isn't Constitutional; the courts are to decide on specific issues within the law, but the law is inherently valid (John Marshall used Marbury v. Madison to save the court from insignificance because he didn't want to make a ruling). Now they are looking to other countries court's rulings for what should and should not apply in our's.
I don't think Congress has that constitutional power. What portion allows it?
I agree with your points. I just don't see how some kind of federal court challenge by Adam and Steve Smith from Nantuckett, Mass. could be prevented when they move to Butt, Montana.
Robert Bork wrote a book fairly recently about the bad situaiton with the constitution and judicial system. I've read "Slouching Towards Gomorrah" twice and it is an excellent boo.k Have either of you read it or his new book? I've got to read the new one. Even uneducated I can understand him - although I have to read it fairly slowly and some sections go through it twice.
The situation currently reminds me of where several train tracks converge, there are trains on each one, heading towards all the other trains. And the engineers are either asleep, on drugs, or suicidal.
We need the right Justices sitting in the Court, which is why it is of the utmost importance to re-elect Bush, and seat a solid majority GOP in Congress.
Read this, and keep in mind that the case law cited supports that idea that the Feds can't force a State into recognizing a same-sex marriage from another State.
Congress could establish a lower court to deal with marriage, for example. Having done so, marriage laws passed by Congress would then be subject to review by the marriage court.
Congress cannot say that no court shall review their laws.
and to make exceptions to the appellate jurisdiction of the supreme court.
Agreed. Such an arrangement could cut both ways though. "Bad" decisions by the marriage court would be final in such a scenario.
Congress could establish a lower court to deal with marriage, for example.
They could, or they could just say that no lower court has jurisdiction regarding same-sex marriage. Since the jurisidiction of the lower courts comes entirely from Congress, Congress can take any matter they want out of that jurisdiction.
Agree that Congress can assign a jurisdiction to a lower court of their own creation.
I'm not sure Congress can remove lower court jurisdiction unless they abolished the lower courts they created, which they have the power to do.
Let's assume for now that Congress can and does remove lower court jurisdiction. The law would then go directly to the USSC since there would be no appellate issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.