Case law. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld being one example.
-- In, say, removing jurisdiction from the 9th circuit to hear cases involving immigration, for example, if they tried to hear them anyway, they should be denied all funds for such endeavors and impeached. --
Congress has succesfully assigned subjet matter jurisdiction to specialty courts, no sweat on that.
I was making a leap that what was being suggested was that -NO- court could have jurisdiction over certain subject matter.
I don't foresee Congress ever doing the right thing on its own. It allowed GWB to create a court, usurp a Congressional power, up to the point that SCOTUS mentioned the GWB had no power to create a court. I think the interval was on the order of four years.
The Government's motion to dismiss, based on the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA), is denied. DTA S:1005(e)(1) provides that "no court ... shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider ... an application for ... habeas corpus filed by ... an alien detained ... at Guantanamo Bay."
-- The possibilities are endless in a lawless society, but that doesn't change what the law says. --
In our society, SCOTUS hallucinates rights to abortion and homosexual marriage, forces people to violate common religious beliefs, facilitates expansion of FedGov well outside constitutional boundaries, allowed (for decades) states to disarm free people, and I'm just getting started. Whatever the law says is just so much hot air.
I was making a leap that what was being suggested was that -NO- court could have jurisdiction over certain subject matter.
Congress can do that, too, if it wants. The courts don't have a Constitutional right to hear any and all cases that they think they should. They only have the legal right to hear what Congress wants them to hear, except as to the Supreme Court, and then only as to what Congress assigns it, with the exception of matters that are mentioned in the Constitution. The courts were designed to be tools to assist Congress in the adjucation of legal matters that Congress assigned them. They have become a super legislature, but they were not supposed to be. Read your federalist papers and the Constitution.
In our society, SCOTUS hallucinates rights to abortion and homosexual marriage, forces people to violate common religious beliefs, facilitates expansion of FedGov well outside constitutional boundaries, allowed (for decades) states to disarm free people, and I'm just getting started. Whatever the law says is just so much hot air.
On that, you and I agree. Congress has a remedy for that, which is what I am suggesting. The public and a lot of lawyers don't understand the powers that Congress has. Not that you are a lawyer, I would bet a lot of money you are not.