From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Sat Jun 29 2002 - 17:24:31 MDT
Samantha Atkins wrote:
>
> Kenneth Hurst wrote:
> > Samantha Atkins wrote:
> >
> >
> >>No "process of law" can overturn a Supreme Court ruling on a
> >>Constitutional issue.
> >
> > That statement ignores the "checks and balances" system. The Supreme Court's
> > decision is not the final authority. No group deserves that kind of power.
> > If unhappy with a Supreme Court decision, the legislature and states can
> > pass an amendment to the Constitution.
>
> Sorry but the Supreme Court does have final authority to
> interpret the Consitution and judge whether or not it is
> violated by any act of the legislature. Yes, the constitution
> can be amended but not simply to overturn a decision of the
> Court. That would be frivolous.
That would be history. Go read a book.
The 1850 Dred Scott case, which forced the hand of the north and south
toward Civil War a decade later (and the 13-16th amendments thereafter,
which overturned Dred Scott). I'd not call freeing the slaves a
frivolous matter, and it took a Constitutional Amendment to do it to
overturn the Supreme Court's own ruling.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:06 MST