Subject:
|
Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 2 Jul 2002 20:32:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3336 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> > This point has come up before in other forms, but there's something that's
> > always messed me up. I thought (but am happy to be corrected) that the
> > Supreme Court has Constitutionally-granted authority to judge the
> > Constitionality of laws. Am I wrong in this?
> I thought that was the entire mandate of the Supreme Court--to judge whether
> or not any law is unconstitutional, and if found to be against the
> Constitution, to be removed.
I'm not looking up the specifics, but as I recall, in the first years of the
Supreme Court, maybe during the reign of Madison(?), the court decided that
some big name law passed by Congress (that we should all remember, but I can't)
was unconstitutional. That was the first time and the power was not in their
mandate. But everyone let it happen, so it was magically their highest
function.
I expect Lindsay or Richard (or someone) will correct me with the real story.
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
395 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
