How can Senate override Supreme Court decision by passing a new law? They are p

Jump to Last Post 1-5 of 5 discussions (11 posts)
  1. brakel2 profile image83
    brakel2posted 6 years ago

    How can Senate override Supreme Court decision by passing a new law?  They are poised to do that now

    It has to do with Hobby Lobby decision.

  2. profile image0
    mbuggiehposted 6 years ago

    The US Congress (using processes specified in the US Constitution regarding "how a bill becomes a law") is free to pass laws without interference from the Judicial or Executive Branches.

    Once any law is passed by Congress (using procedures again specified in the US Constitution) the president is free to veto the bill and the Supreme Court---if a challenge to the law is brought, is free to nullify the law through the process of judicial review.

    1. dashingscorpio profile image86
      dashingscorpioposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Excellent answer! It will not be the first time this has happened. If the new law is constitutionally challenged as was Obamacare it will be sent to the Supreme Court. Parties unhappy with Obamacare still want to repeal it but it would be vetoed.

    2. profile image0
      mbuggiehposted 6 years agoin reply to this


      A new Congress and new president will, very surely, take up the issue of Obamacare/Affordable Care Act despite the fact that the Supreme Court has ruled its mandate constitutional. And, SCOTUS can, and does, reverse itself if only rarely.

    3. LandmarkWealth profile image73
      LandmarkWealthposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      In reality the court didn't exactly rule the mandate constitutional. They said since you still aren't really mandated under the law as you have the right to pay a fine instead, then it is a tax. And the constitution permits the gov't to levy taxes.

    4. profile image0
      mbuggiehposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Right...SCOTUS accepted the claim of the government's lawyers that the fine was or acted as a tax, and is therefore, as constitutional.

    5. LandmarkWealth profile image73
      LandmarkWealthposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Agreed. I was simply pointing out that in the opinion, they didn't not accept the premise that the gov't could mandate you to buy anything.  Only that the gov't could freely tax you.  Although a tax for failing to buy something was a new precedent.

  3. LandmarkWealth profile image73
    LandmarkWealthposted 6 years ago

    The senate does not pass laws on it's own.  The entire legislative apparatus along with the executive branch can pass any law they want when they agree.  But if the law violates the was the case in the Hobby Lobby decision...the court can strike down the law.  The only recourse is to pass a constitutional amendment.  The process by which either the congress or the states via a constitutional convention can ratify the constitution is as follows as per the text of article 5:

    " The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate "

  4. junkseller profile image83
    junksellerposted 6 years ago

    Free Exercise jurisprudence goes back a long way. Free Exercise being the clause in the Constitution saying that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

    In the 60s and 70s the prevailing attitude of the court was that the state should have a very good reason to impact the free exercise of one's religion.

    Here is a relevant passage from the court case Frank v. Alaska (1979):
    Because of the close relationship between conduct and belief and because of the high value we assign to religious beliefs, religiously impelled actions can be forbidden only where they pose "some substantial threat to public safety, peace or order," Sherbert v. Verner (1963), or where there are competing governmental interests that are "of the highest order and . . . . [are] not otherwise served . . . ." Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972).

    That attitude started to shift until the case Employment Div. of Oregon v, Smith (1990) where the court decided that the state didn't need a compelling interest at all and could limit the exercise of religion simply for a generally applicable law (in that case it was peyote use).

    Congress overwhelmingly felt the court had gone too far and passed the Religious Freedom Restoratation Act of 1993 (RFRA). This law returned the court standard to what it had been before, where a law had to have a compelling interest to burden one's religious exercise and be as least restrictive as possible.

    In the Hobby Lobby case, Hobby Lobby didn't make a direct Constitutional appeal, their claim was that their rights were violated according to RFRA.

    What the Senate is trying to do is simply pass a new law saying that you can't use RFRA to evade the requirements of the Affordable Care Act. In essence over-riding themselves.

    Actually what I should say they are trying to do is get politicians on record of being for or against that idea, since they obviously know that it has no real chance of becoming law.

  5. profile image0
    Nancy's Nicheposted 6 years ago

    Our government has a lawless leader who sends the wrong messages to other areas of government. That needs to stop before they have all fallen into the obis of lawlessness. Following s a paragraph I found in the link below so please go there to read the full explanation...

    Congress cannot override a Supreme Court decision. If the decision interprets the Constitution or an Amendment, Congress cannot override the decision except by calling for a Constitutional Convention to change that provision of the Constitution or Amendment. … t_decision

    1. junkseller profile image83
      junksellerposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      "If the decision interprets a federal law, Congress can amend or replace the law to correct its deficiency." The Hobby Lobby case was an interpretation of federal law, not the Constitution.


This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

Show Details
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)