Show of HandsShow of Hands

Arkansas123 August 9th, 2015 5:46pm

In non-constitutional cases, is it appropriate for Congress to overturn court decisions with which it disagrees; or does congressional action to undo disagreeable rulings by judges undermine our government's system of checks and balances?

7 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
08/09/15 1:41 pm

It's Congress' job to legislate, so if a law is struck down, Congress has every right to replace it.

Reply
TheCameron UCF
08/09/15 12:06 pm

If congress doesn't like the way the courts interpret their laws they can pass new laws, of course.

Reply
Dazey Beagles Rule
08/09/15 11:32 am

The court provides a check on Congress, not the other way around. Congress passes laws and the court reviews them. The only time the court can appear to "make laws" is when there is a void of laws passed by Congress.

Reply
geoag02 Dallas, TX
08/09/15 12:24 pm

Really?! So why have congress. If the court will always have the final say, why don't we cut out the middleman (congress) and save the tax payers some money.

Dazey Beagles Rule
08/09/15 1:17 pm

Um, because Congress creates the laws.

geoag02 Dallas, TX
08/09/15 1:21 pm

So congress has to first create a law before the court can rewrite it. The court can't start with a blank piece of paper? I guess they need congress to at least write the title for them and pass it.

Dazey Beagles Rule
08/09/15 1:27 pm

That makes no sense. The courts do not write laws, Congress does. You're off on some tangent.

semperdog21 Oklahoma
08/09/15 8:33 pm

No. The supreme court can over rule the executive branch. Exec can veto legislation and legislation is suppose to be able to over rule the judicial mainly by writting law. The constitution gave little power to the supreme court except the ability to

semperdog21 Oklahoma
08/09/15 8:33 pm

Over rule the executive branch.

geoag02 Dallas, TX
08/09/15 10:50 am

If congress can not overturn court decisions, that would mean there is no check or balance on the court.

Reply
Arkansas123 Neoconservative
08/09/15 10:49 am

A follow-up on yesterday's poll.

I was surprised how many users were opposed in principle to my suggestion that Congress should overturn court decisions against voter integrity laws.

In my view, Congress's power to overturn is a check on judges.

Reply
musiman28 Cotton country
08/09/15 3:27 pm

Overturn yes. But your question yesterday seemed, to me at least, to say make the law exempt from judicial review, thereby bypassing the courts check on congress.

Arkansas123 Neoconservative
08/09/15 3:34 pm

If Congress wants to make voter integrity laws unreviewable under the Voting Rights Act, it is acting in a perfectly legitimate way. The VRA is an act of Congress, and the Supreme Court has already ruled that voter ID is constitutionally permissible.

musiman28 Cotton country
08/09/15 3:54 pm

True, yet I still feel making it unreviewable is heading down a slippery slope. How about we pass a law making owning a Chevrolet illegal and whole we're at it, make it unreviewable by the court system.

Arkansas123 Neoconservative
08/09/15 3:57 pm

That's not actually possible. During trial, a Chevy owner or dealer could raise a constitutional defense.

musiman28 Cotton country
08/09/15 4:02 pm

Yet it'a possible in the case of voter ID? Care to explain?

Arkansas123 Neoconservative
08/09/15 4:09 pm

Some judges have been striking down voter integrity laws under the Voting Rights Act, which is not part of the Constitution. To undo these decisions and bar future injunctions in this area, Congress could amend the VRA to shield voter integrity laws.

musiman28 Cotton country
08/09/15 7:50 pm

But why is it different than another case. Either congress can write the courts out of the checks and balances or they can't.

Arkansas123 Neoconservative
08/09/15 8:16 pm

You do realize that there are different levels of law, right?

musiman28 Cotton country
08/10/15 4:55 am

But all laws should be reviewable by the courts.

musiman28 Cotton country
08/10/15 7:59 pm

I'm done. If you cannot see what I'm saying there is no more use in the conversation.

Arkansas123 Neoconservative
08/10/15 8:04 pm

I see what you're saying. It's just nonsense. If federal courts are striking down state laws under a federal law, Congress has the authority to shield the state laws from federal judges by amending the federal law.

musiman28 Cotton country
08/10/15 8:07 pm

Changing a law yes, but unreviewable no. You can't be seeing what I'm talking about. If congress can just add wording to bypass the courts, they can do it to the President too, thereby making both impotent.