Where does the constitution give federal judges the power to repeal laws?

[ShootSpeeders]

[

Who do you think determines the Constitutionality of laws if not the Judicial branch?

Congress should and if the public disagrees we can vote them out. Now tell us who acts as a check on the Supreme Court.? THINK

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[

Nullification isn't repealing. .

HAHAHA. That's a joke post, right??

 

[dblack]

[

Who do you think determines the Constitutionality of laws if not the Judicial branch?

Congress should and if the public disagrees we can vote them out.

That's a really hilarious conception of checks and balances. So tell me, if Congress votes to abolish elections, what should we do about that?

 

[Faun]

[

Who do you think determines the Constitutionality of laws if not the Judicial branch?

Congress should and if the public disagrees we can vote them out. Now tell us who acts as a check on the Supreme Court.? THINK

That's beyond retarded. Par for the course for you, however. According to your idiocy, the same folks responsible for passing laws are also responsible for determining if their own laws are Constitutional.

According to your lunacy, Congress can pass a law banning all future elections and there's nothing the people can do about it.

And the Supreme Court does not act alone. Laws get challenged at several levels before even reaching the Supreme Court.

 

[regent]

Remember President Jackson's response to a Court decision: the Court made its decision let them enforce it.
Of course the Constitution did not give the Court the power to decide if laws or acts meet the Constitution, but the nation has now accepted the Marbury decision and abide by it. The ironic part is that some on the Court now wants to go by original intent.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

According to your lunacy, Congress can pass a law banning all future elections and there's nothing the people can do about it.

If anyone is going to write a law banning elections, it would be the supreme court. Now tell us how the public will stop them.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Remember President Jackson's response to a Court decision: the Court made its decision let them enforce it.
Of course the Constitution did not give the Court the power to decide if laws or acts meet the Constitution, but the nation has now accepted the Marbury decision and abide by it. The ironic part is that some on the Court now wants to go by original intent.

HAHAHA. You call that an argument??? "It's been like that for 200 years so it must be ok". Slavery existed in america for hundreds of years too. Did that make it right.?

Fact remains that the very first words of the constitution after the premble are "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states".

So if you want to write a law or repeal a law, you have to go to congress.

 

[Skylar]

Remember President Jackson's response to a Court decision: the Court made its decision let them enforce it.
Of course the Constitution did not give the Court the power to decide if laws or acts meet the Constitution, but the nation has now accepted the Marbury decision and abide by it. The ironic part is that some on the Court now wants to go by original intent.

HAHAHA. You call that an argument??? "It's been like that for 200 years so it must be ok". Slavery existed in america for hundreds of years too. Did that make it right.?

Fact remains that the very first words of the constitution after the premble are "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states".

So if you want to write a law or repeal a law, you have to go to congress.

If you want to decide which law gets enacted in exclusion of the other if two laws conflict......you go to the judiciary.

And if congress writes a law that conflicts with the constitution, its up to the judiciary to give priority to the constitution. And not the statute. As the constitution is fundamental law.

 

[Faun]

According to your lunacy, Congress can pass a law banning all future elections and there's nothing the people can do about it.

If anyone is going to write a law banning elections, it would be the supreme court. Now tell us how the public will stop them.

Moron... you think the Congress can pass a law to ban elections and it would be Constitutional because Congress says so. Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court cannot write laws, so your supposition, as freakishly bizarre as it is, can't happen.

 

[dblack]

According to your lunacy, Congress can pass a law banning all future elections and there's nothing the people can do about it.

If anyone is going to write a law banning elections, it would be the supreme court. Now tell us how the public will stop them.

They have no power to write such a law. Congress does. You can avoid the question, but that only proves your position is weak.

 

[regent]

Remember it is the executive that enforces the laws and if the Court makes a goofy decision the president may not enforce it. Then the Congress can impeach and remove members of the Court.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

And if congress writes a law that conflicts with the constitution, its up to the judiciary to give priority to the constitution. And not the statute. As the constitution is fundamental law.

Yes the constitution is fundamental law but nowhere does the constitution say judges have power to decide if a law is constitutional or not. The president could just as easily say he has the power. Or state governors. Even an idiot like you has as much claim to assert this power as the supreme court. THINK

 

[ShootSpeeders]

If anyone is going to write a law banning elections, it would be the supreme court. Now tell us how the public will stop them.

Moron... you think the Congress can pass a law to ban elections and it would be Constitutional because Congress says so. Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court cannot write laws, so your supposition, as freakishly bizarre as it is, can't happen.[/QUOTE]

The court writes law all the time. In fact they call it that - case law. That's the tern they use, you nitwit. They did it in roe v wade and plyler v doe and hundreds of other times, THINK

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Remember it is the executive that enforces the laws and if the Court makes a goofy decision the president may not enforce it. Then the Congress can impeach and remove members of the Court.

Name one time congress has removed an SC judge by the impeachment process.

That's right, it's never happened. Theoretically it could but it never has and it never will. There is no oversight of the SC. They have final say on everything and yet they answer to no one.

 

[dblack]

The court writes law all the time. In fact they ...

So - you still haven't answered the question. If you don't think the Court should have the power to nullify laws that are unconstitutional, what prevents Congress from banning elections? What recourse would we have then? Do you really want Congress to have that kind of unchecked power?

 

[Faun]

If anyone is going to write a law banning elections, it would be the supreme court. Now tell us how the public will stop them.

Moron... you think the Congress can pass a law to ban elections and it would be Constitutional because Congress says so. Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court cannot write laws, so your supposition, as freakishly bizarre as it is, can't happen.

The court writes law all the time. In fact they call it that - case law. That's the tern they use, you nitwit. They did it in roe v wade and plyler v doe and hundreds of other times, THINK[/QUOTE]
You're truly retarded. Case law is not writing new laws. It's ruling on cases based on prior rulings.

Seriously, WTF is wrong with you?

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[
You're truly retarded. Case law is not writing new laws. It's ruling on cases based on prior rulings.

Seriously, WTF is wrong with you?

It's not law?? Then it's not binding on anyone is it.?? Make up your mind, moron.

 

[Faun]

[
You're truly retarded. Case law is not writing new laws. It's ruling on cases based on prior rulings.

Seriously, WTF is wrong with you?

It's not law?? Then it's not binding on anyone is it.?? Make up your mind, moron.

You are truly insane. That's not what I said.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The very first words of the constitution after the preamble are

All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states

Writing laws and repealing laws are legislative powers and yet federal judges are constantly declaring laws unconstitutional and repealing them and sometimes even writing a new law in its place!

The power was usurped by the court under Marbury v. Madison.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Remember it is the executive that enforces the laws and if the Court makes a goofy decision the president may not enforce it. Then the Congress can impeach and remove members of the Court.

Presidents don't do that. The courts claim their opinion is "the law of the land" and must be enforced like a law written by congress.!!! Presidents should do what you say but they don't.