I never said that.
Actually, nothing in the Constitution gives them the power to do what they have done. Their decision in that case is unconstitutional and illegal.
Article 3, Section 2: "In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, 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." "Jurisdiction" is defined as "the power, right, or authority to interpret and apply the law". Constitutionally they do have that power.
Sounds like it, if you view all USSC decisions as valid. Does that include decisions based on cherry-picked foreign law?
“Constitutionally they do have that power.”
No, they don’t. They assumed that power themselves. This “sole arbiter of the Constitution” thing. Congress is too cowardly to call them on it. Constitutionally, they have very LITTLE power beyond what is granted by Congress. They (read the Federalist Papers) were intended to be the weakest branch, not the strongest.