Looks Like They Aren’t Unelected Tyrants In Black Robes
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) should be limited to only returning laws to Congress based on their constitutionality. Under no circumstances should SCOTUS (or any other court) be given the power to write, modify or cancel laws enacted through the Constitutionally enumerated powers of Congress.
The problem? Only a constitutional amendment can remove the ability of the SCOTUS to adjudicate the validity of laws passed by the Congress. According to Article 3, Section 2 of the Constitution:
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;-to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;-to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;-to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;-to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;-between Citizens of different States;—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
The power of the SCOTUS to modify or “cancel” laws passed by Congress is clearly set forth in the Constitution. There is absolutely no question as to whether or not the Court has the power to adjudicate questions of law or equity arising from laws passed by both state legislatures and the federal Congress. If a law, or a portion of that law is “adjudicated” by the Court and found to be not Constitutional law, the SCOTUS has in fact changed the law. The Court does not have to “persuade” anyone that a law is not Constitutional. It has the power expressly given it by the Constitution to adjudicate laws. Congress is then free to pass a new law replacing the first which meets Constitutional muster.
Unelected Tyrants in Black Robes?
The founders created the judiciary and a Supreme Court for the purpose of checking the Congress and the Executive on extra-constitutional laws and executive decrees. The founders made the judiciary independent, in terms of not having to directly face the electorate so members of the Judiciary would not be subject to the political whims of a misguided electorate temporarily enchanted with some particular philosophy.
The Founders obviously counted on a non-politicized judiciary. Do we still have that?