Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Dont call me Shirley

(10,998 posts)

8. The USSC does not have the constitutional right to jugde on the constitutionality

Reply to PoliticAverse (Original post)

Thu Apr 5, 2012, 04:37 PM

Apr 2012

of laws passed by the democratically elected legislature and signed by the democratically elected president. This power was usrped by the SC in the 1803 Marbury vs Madison. President Thomas Jefferson did not think this was a good decision, being an intergral part of the writing of the US Constitution specifically did not give the USSC this right.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

36 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Holder: Judicial review 'beyond dispute' [View all] PoliticAverse Apr 2012 OP

Holder's entire letter (.pdf) can be found here... PoliticAverse Apr 2012 #1

Thanks, Averse. elleng Apr 2012 #2

Personally, I found the President's remarks to be unremarkable. WheelWalker Apr 2012 #3

Was it three pages, single spaced? shawn703 Apr 2012 #4

Yes, it was. n/t PoliticAverse Apr 2012 #5

Nope. I heard on MSNBC that it was 2 1/2 pages. Pirate Smile Apr 2012 #6

why not just increase the font size? Celebration Apr 2012 #7

The USSC does not have the constitutional right to jugde on the constitutionality Dont call me Shirley Apr 2012 #8

And to that point... Liberal_Stalwart71 Apr 2012 #9

The Courts are the one that have corrupted this country AZ Progressive Apr 2012 #10

Very well said AZ fasttense Apr 2012 #35

It's certainly true that the express power of Article III rsdsharp Apr 2012 #11

So if Congress passes a law that is inconsistent with the constitution on its face, what happens? onenote Apr 2012 #14

I'll respond, onenote. elleng Apr 2012 #16

Bingo. onenote Apr 2012 #20

Shirley, this is Article III of the United States Constitution. elleng Apr 2012 #17

Thom? Someone didn't get your message. izquierdista Apr 2012 #12

Thom's the one who needs the lessons. elleng Apr 2012 #18

I am in the Thom camp on this one. izquierdista Apr 2012 #22

You were taught that the Supreme Court lacks the power to decide if a law is consititutional? onenote Apr 2012 #23

REALLY!!! elleng Apr 2012 #27

That they usurped that role izquierdista Apr 2012 #29

Had I been Holder, I would have told this liberalhistorian Apr 2012 #13

Which is why you'll never be Holder. onenote Apr 2012 #15

Right, onenote; Holder did a fine job. elleng Apr 2012 #19

and more people will read that letter and hear about what it says onenote Apr 2012 #21

I agree. Hope DUers will 'get it.' elleng Apr 2012 #25

I agree with you and onenote. I viewed the request, as apparently did Holder, WheelWalker Apr 2012 #24

In a brilliant twist, Holder expressly disclsimed that he was filing a supplemental brief onenote Apr 2012 #26

GOOD ONE! elleng Apr 2012 #28

Holder didn't write that lettter. Psephos Apr 2012 #30

His staff wrote it; he approved and signed it. elleng Apr 2012 #31

Oh, I understand that and I agree. liberalhistorian Apr 2012 #32

May or may not have been 'legally required,' elleng Apr 2012 #33

DOMA. Igel Apr 2012 #34

Followup: Eric Holder on ‘Obamacare’ Homework Assignment: ‘It Was Under Three Pages! PoliticAverse Apr 2012 #36