Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
Steve King (R-Iowa) with support from our very own Ted Yoho (R-FL) have drawn up a bill that will tell the Supreme Court and all Federal courts what political cases they may not consider. The court must say, we are so sorry but the GOP has ruled that our Constitutional authority to judge has been stripped in this matter. This legislation of course is from those Constitutional conservative who loudly bray about our Founding Fathers and original intent.
No such proposal has ever become law, but if the right wing of the right wing party has its way, there might be a lot of interesting topics they would tell the justices not to judge.
https://steveking.house.gov/media-ce...n-marriage-act
Steve King is trying to block the Supreme Court from deciding marriage equality
It is well established in most sane quarters that it is the role of the court to interpret the Constitution. The role of Congress is to amend the Constitution with the support of the states when such adjustments are needed. But those who can read and took American history or a course on the Constitution already knew that.
" Back in the 1980s, Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) repeatedly tried to prevent federal courts from hearing cases related to school prayer. About a decade ago, Sam Brownback and Todd Akin (remember him?) worked on similar measures related to the Pledge of Allegiance" |
Actually, if you look at what the Supreme Court has "legislated" on a variety of issues over the past 40 years or so, it's clear that the separation of powers has gotten out of whack. Which is to say, the SC has become way too powerful and we need more balance on the scales, or check and balance if you prefer.
Thus, what's really needed is a statute, or possibly an amendment, which gives the Congress a 2/3s override capability on any ruling the court issues. In addition, I would advocate term limits (say 10 years) for SC Justices. Ruth Buzzi, for example, is senile and apparently a drunk as well.