Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Opinion

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Opinion

    If a proposed amendment violated the constitution, should the supreme court be able to block its ratification? Seriously.

  • #2
    No.

    Although it seems to make sense on it's face, the supreme court should not be able to interefere with the making of laws/amendments, only to interpret them after the fact.

    Consider this: If the supreme court were able to 'try' a law or amendment before enaction, then congress would have to go through the supreme court every time they wanted to pass a law. In this scenario, the court would have complety usurped the constitutional powers of congress with what amounts to a veto.

    Vetoing questionable actions of congress is the role of the Executive branch and provisions are in place for the executive and congressional sides to settle these impasses. Additionally, if congress or the president are passing unacceptable laws, the people can vote them out of office. Not so with the courts.


    Interesting idea though. Thanks

    Comment


    • #3
      Another thought:

      The supreme court is arguably the most powerful of the branches of government. This because they have the final say on all matters, and they are not subject to election. The main offset on thier power is that it takes months or years for them to act on any subject. Taking that limitation away could quickly lead to an oligarchy-type situation wherein the congress and president were mere rubber stampers.

      Comment


      • #4
        the supreme court could step in if ... following improper procedures of modifying the consitiuition.
        If congress were not ratifiing the amendment in question according to constitutional procedure this would be an impeachable offense, and I think the president would have the power to bring charges, which would eventually end up with the supreme court.
        I think that's how it works anyway.

        Comment


        • #5
          There are a few ways to remove supreme court judges. It's been awhile but they can be removed by congress for unappropraite conduct such as commiting a felony and such.

          Also during martial law the supreme court takes a backseat. So an executive order involking martial law can short circuit judicial oversight in the short term.

          Comment


          • #6
            I'm not that great in politics but what if the amendment were something like "People have the right to abortion" or "Abortion is forbidden"? What then? My guess is that supreme court will probably block it.

            Comment


            • #7
              depends on how it's written and who is on the court when it is reviewed. An amendment to the actual constitution is a huge undertaking. Requiring a majority of voters to decide that it is something they want. That makes the supreme court have to really consider their action.

              But the supreme court has damaged amendments before. They did not however rule prohibition unconstitutional. It was later repealed by congress.

              So no they may not do anything at all, or yes they might spring in to action.

              That being said, The judiciary upholds the consitution. there is little they can do if the actual constitution has been changed.

              Comment


              • #8
                Excerpted from the U.S. Constitution:

                Article. V.
                The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof,

                -------

                Two thirds of the Senate, and two thirds of the house have to agree on the amendment. Then, three fourths of state legisatures have to approve the final draft.

                If there were that much support for an amendment then the court probably wouldn't step in, because the people- as represented by overwhelming majority of elected officals - will have spoken.

                Comment

                Working...
                X