I'm merely pointing out that nowhere in the Constitution does it say a Supreme Court decision needs your approval to be valid.
Does that include decisions based on cherry-picked foreign law?
For example?
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.
Marshall summed it up in his Marbury v. Madison decision, "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each." My question to you is if not the Supreme Court then who? Would you have the court not be a branch at all? Do away with the checks and balances altogether? Let Congress and the President do what they wish because, after all, that's how Jeff Davis wanted it?
Nowhere does it say that the USSC is the law of the land.
In fact, they are not to be the most powerful branch.
“For example?”
You really should pay attention to the antics of the USSC:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-07-07-foreign-usat_x.htm
“Marshall summed it up in his Marbury v. Madison decision”
Jefferson had a somewhat different opinion of this.
“My question to you is if not the Supreme Court then who”
All three branches.
” Do away with the checks and balances altogether? “
With this all-powerful court we have and you bow to, we have no “checks and balances”.
“Let Congress and the President do what they wish because, after all, that’s how Jeff Davis wanted it?”
Why are you fine with allowing unelected lawyers to do as they wish? When there is no bound placed on their decisions - such as their unconstitutional use of foreign laws to “interpret” the Constitution and they may make up things as they go along, we have no checks and balances. We have no liberty.
Read some of Thomas and Scalia’s dissents sometime.