Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Jim 0216

But, in Marbury v Madison, the court arrogated to itself the right of judicial review and then through subsequent rulings arrogated to itself even more power to interpret more things as any one of the parties to a contract sought relief in the courts.


8 posted on 06/19/2017 11:53:27 AM PDT by Ouderkirk (To the left, everything must evidence that this or that strand of leftist theory is true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Ouderkirk

Judicial review in the sense of judging the constitutionality of the acts of the two other branches is legitimate and not unconstitutional.

But “judicial supremacy” is certainly not constitutional. The judiciary consisting of unelected federal officials, is, if anything, the weakest of the three branches because its scope is limited to individual cases and controversies and it has no power to enforce its decisions. And the judiciary is subject to the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land (Art VI, Cl 2) and any decision violating the Constitution is null and void.

Also because of the Supremacy Clause (Id.) as confirmed also by the 9th and 10th Amendments, all three federal branches and every state has the constitutional power to question the constitutionality of the acts of a branch of the feds.


14 posted on 06/19/2017 12:24:17 PM PDT by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson