Well, this is a new, awful, low...

[eredien]

This is especially true when the power to interpret the Constitution rests in the hands of activist judges anxious to find the latest ``right'' hiding between the lines of our founding document.

That just makes me mad, but why the man said that makes me seething:

They're starting a bill that would let Congress, by a two-thirds majority vote, overturn Supreme Court Decisions.

My country. Hell. Handbasket.

Swiped from ancalemon.

Comments

[daisho.livejournal.com]

Interestingly, the British constitution (with a small C, since it's based on convention and piecemeal lawmaking, rather than a single document) has given the legislative branch supreme authority since the days of the Magna Carta.

The British courts only really decided they had the power to overrule the legislature in 1989, when a judge struck down an Act of Parliament because it conflicted with European law (the only significant part of Britain's constitution that is enshrined in statute).

In the intervening 774 years, there haven't been too many flagrant misuses of power by parliamentary groups with large majorities. OTOH, we've been at this democracy lark long enough to knock the edges off legislative sovereignty. I'm not at all sure Congress is ready for the ability to ride roughshod over minority interests...