Could you cite for me the article and section of the Constitution that grants SCOTUS that power? Where do they derive the authority to nullify or amend laws?
"The Constitution states that it is the Supreme Law of the Land and SCOTUS is the supreme arbiter of that law. Congress cannot pass a law that bypasses that part of the Constitution."
reply---
"Could you cite for me the article and section of the Constitution that grants SCOTUS that power? Where do they derive the authority to nullify or amend laws?"
my reply---
SCOTUS gave THEMSELVES that power - the most dangerous of all!
From Article III, Section 2:"... the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."
The Constitution explicitly permits the Supreme Court to rule on the Law. It is not reasonable to expect that the Constitution will be the supreme law of the land and also expect that any legislation whatever is not in conflict with it. The amendment process is available whenever Congress desires to modify the Constitution. Otherwise, their legislation must be in accordance with it.
I am no expert in this matter, but even where the Supreme Court is denied appellate power, that does not necessarily imply that lower courts would be denied jurisdiction. Every court has the duty to say what the law is. If the officers of the court have taken an oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution", then I will not find myself surprised if they occasionally find that legislation is not Constitutional. That is their duty.
The only reason that people don't focus on the "judicial review" of the lower courts is that the Supreme Court typically has the last word and lower courts will often defer to their prior decisions. The Nuremberg trials made quite clear that judges have duties that transend just blindly applying legislation.
I fail to see what all the concern is about. The idea that the President has unchecked power to simply take prisoners and execute them off the battlefield is repugnant. And yet, without the power of Congress to legislate otherwise, the President would have that power.
One of the articles I read contained the surprising assertion that we should be able to treat Al Qaeda as if it were a nation because it had declared war against us. People seem to want to have the outcome they desire with very little logical consistency.