[AnalogReigns]

At 39 through 41, Brutus points out that decisions of the Supreme Court are final and cannot be appealed to Congress, short of amending the Constitution. Is this something that should be changed, and in what manner?

I wonder about this, as, as heretical as it seems to most all lawyers and judges (since it is foundational to their power and importance...), I'm still not convinced as to the full constitutionality of Marbury v. Madison. It seems to me that Marbury was the first major incidence of judicial activism which today of course in certain incidences has become full blown judicial tyranny (see Roe v. Wade).

I can't say I have any solution, except that there needs to be one:

5 senior citizens should not be deciding the most controversial issues of the day based on the fictional quicksand of a "living Constitution" as that is simply not in any way democratic...or fit for a great Republic.

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

Pennsylvania Surpeme Court Judge John Bannister Gibson's famous dissent in the case Eakin v. Raub concerns this very issue. I used to think that Gibson was crazy in my young stupid student days, but have come around to thinking that he was absolutely correct.

Marshall V. Gibson: Head To Head

[Bigun]

I'm still not convinced as to the full constitutionality of Marbury v. Madison. It seems to me that Marbury was the first major incidence of judicial activism which today of course in certain incidences has become full blown judicial tyranny (see Roe v. Wade).

That my FRiend is a VERY astute and correct statement!

The idea that men who had just defeated the greatest power on earth to gain their freedom would turn around and give federal magistrates the power to determine the limits of that new federal government is just plain ludicrous!

[Publius]

Several weeks ago, someone posted an article from "Natinal Review", "Weekly Standard", or some other publication that argued that Marbury never was intended to be as sweeping as has been claimed. It was the Warren Court that took Marbury to excess.

I wish somebody could find that article.

[Publius]

Never mind. I found the information in the first half of Gingrich's speech. It was the 1958 Cooper decision.

[Huck]

I can't say I have any solution, except that there needs to be one:

The solution is to ditch Article 3.