I’ve heard of this constitutional provision. But it’s rarely used. I wonder if it’s rarely used because both parties want to be able to allow for lawsuits over laws passed by Congress???
Interestingly, in the case which the article cites, one could argue that Congress repealing the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to hear a case already pending would constitute an ex post facto law, which is prohibited by the Constitution. Congress could prohibit the court from reviewing future cases, but not current ones.
Constitutional Amendment?
13th, 14th Amendment to void Dred Scott comes to mind...
The Supreme Court reversed itself on the WW II Enemy Combatants/Detainees case. And I am sure they would on this as well. John Roberts would not hesitate. We’d just be opening the door to an even bigger judicial power grab.
Its a jobs program for lawyers.
Congress could make the Federal Judiciary disappear tomorrow if it wanted to.
Most social issue cases (Roe/Obergefell) apply to states, where the Court has original jurisdiction.
If Congress decides to totally bar government sanctioned sodomy or womb murder, then it can bar the Supreme Court too.
Because the Constitution also says that any bill requiring the action of both the House and Senate MUST go to the President for signature.
That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be in every bill, and that the Congress shouldn’t fight the issue, but the president’s veto power is a consideration.
Neither gutless nor ignorant. Treacherous. They don’t use their powers in this regard because it would end the gravy train their riding.
So question the remains, why is this Congress so gutless or ignorant to use this power?
Simple answer, they approve of what the court is doing especially since they get to blame the court and lie to the voters about it.