According to the constitution does the Federal Supreme Court have the power of judicial review ?
The idea that the Supreme Court should be the arbiter of constitutionality issues has become so ingrained that most people incorrectly believe that the Constitution granted this power to the federal judiciary. Did you know that while the U.S. Constitution does not explicitly define a "power" of judicial review, the authority for judicial review in the United States has been inferred from the structure, provisions, and history of the Constitution. Examine http://constitutionality.us/USConstitution.html#art3 to assure yourself that no power of Judicial Review is granted by the constitution.
While perhaps not to your complete satisfaction, the following item certainly seems to remove any doubt about who is considered to be in the position to do exactly that:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_r … ted_States
This suits my concept of what their mission is.
Only thing that satisfies me is an actual answer to the actual question, Apparently you think everything is as it should be, and that is fine with me. Certainly better than bloviating about seeds and trees, time travel and "it" whatever "it" is.
From what I understand so far, the majority of the founders did support a limited form of judicial review but would not have approved today's type of review as it has evolved into a judicial supremacy over Congress.
Federalist no 78 expressed that the province of the courts were to interpret the law. and that the Constitution was superior to ordinary law. The Supreme court was to void laws contrary to the Constitution.
Originally all three branch of government also felt is was their duty to interpret the Constitution and not just leave it to the courts. At times the executive branch would refuse to enforce decisions of the courts because it felt the courts had overstepped their authority. Congress would also debate the Constitutionality of its own bills not just leave it to the courts.
The founders felt that the ultimate arbitrator of the Constitution were the people not the courts. And Congress more closely represented the people than the executive or judicial branches because they were the most accountable and closest branch representing the will of the people.
What we have today is a Congress that has ceded its most important powers to the judicial and executive branches so that they are relived of having to make important Constitutional decisions. They do this because they've made a career out of being a politician.
The Judicial branch was originally intended to be the weakest branch and under the oversight of Congress because Congress has the power to limit the scope and jurisdiction of judicial power. They also had the power to impeach judges for violations of the Constitution.
by IDONO 5 years ago
Should issues be proven to be constitutional BEFORE they reach the voter ballot?It seems that the voice of the people don't mean much anymore. We vote yea or nay on issues, then many times the result is appealed as unconstitutional. Maybe these issues should go before the Supreme Court before it...
by breathe2travel 6 years ago
Do you think the Supreme Court should rule on the constitutionality of legislation?In the past, conservatives have cried foul when liberals sought to strike down conservative policy with judicial review. Today's headlines tell us President Obama is crying, "foul!" now that his...
by niall.tubbs 7 years ago
I don't know anyone in America that doesn't support the freedom of religion. Why do you ask?
by Sharon Stajda 5 weeks ago
My question - In general, how do you feel about the right to religious freedom being used in this specific Supreme Court decision? Does one have the right to discriminate due to a religious belief? The Supreme Court ruled today in favor of a Colorado cake baker who refused to make a...
by Reality Bytes 6 years ago
Appearing on Egyptian television before concluding a four-day trip in Egypt, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg extolled the virtues of the U.S. Constitution but urged Egyptians to look to other countries' newer constitutions for guidance as they craft their own in the coming months.The U.S. Embassy in...
by C.J. Wright 7 years ago
Recently the addition of 500 waivers brought the total number of waivers to over 700 entities that are allowed to "opt" out of the new Health Care Law. Now we see that the Senate has agreed to repeal the 1099 provison for business purchases. This repeal removes an estimated 17 Billion...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This 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.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We 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 Pixels||We 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.|