The very function of the Supreme Court as a branch of the government is to overturn laws that a majority of the Justices find inconsistent with the Constitution. That this is the function of the Supreme Court was established by Marbury vs. Madison:
- It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of each.
So, if a law be in opposition to the Constitution, if both the law and the Constitution apply to a particular case, so that the Court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution, or conformably to the Constitution, disregarding the law, the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.
If, then, the Courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the Legislature, the Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply....
The Supreme Court overturns laws every year. If it did not overturn laws, there would be no need for its existence. We are left with the President of the United States, himself a former professor of constitutional law, making the statement that the Supreme Court, functioning in its normal role, is behaving in an extraordinary, unprecedented manner and engaging in judicial activism.
This is either ignorance or revolution.
No comments:
Post a Comment