[steelhead_trout]

“but that last third is all about the supremacy of the/a constitution over a legislature’s “normal acts”.”

---

That’s as may be, but there’s nothing in the Constitution explicitly giving the SCOTUS the power to determine that. And other functioning representative republics (including Canada until the early 1980s) did quite well without judicial review.

[OneWingedShark]

And other functioning representative republics (including Canada until the early 1980s) did quite well without judicial review.

Then to whom does one turn for questions of the law?
My favorite example is NM's constitution, which explicitly prohibits a law "abridging the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense" (and also expressly says "No county or municipality shall regulate, in any way, the right to keep and bear arms."), yet there are municipal, county, and state court-houses which have posted signs barring weapons saying violators will be prosecuted.

So then, under what law would the be prosecuted? If the state constitution is binding on the state/county/municipality then how can that political division require the abridgment of the citizen's right to keep and bear arms for security and defense? Moreover, how does one challenge situations like this?