http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/8238461.htm

Basically a bunch of Republicans, especially the moral conservative Republicans want to pass a bill (not even an amendment, yet) to stop judicial activism by allowing congress to override judicial decisions that make congressional laws unconstitutional with a 2/3 vote.

I doubt it will get passed. Right now it has just been started in the House, but I heard about it because my representative is a co-sponsor and someone brought it up in class.

As far as my opinion on the matter, it's an interesting idea but probably not the best. I think that there definately needs to be some kind of check on the court, seeing that they have 9 guys that are elected for life and can run the country with no checks. BUT, congress then has just about no check on it (if it acts as a whole) and so it can go wild I suppose.

..but that's speaking as branch vs branch, which isn't so much the case anymore (or ever). It's mainly ideology vs ideology, and the congress generally is the best representation of the ideology of the people out of the 3 branches of the federal government. To have a 2/3 vote in congress you are almost guranteed to have almost all or all people of one party as well as a decent amount of the other party's group to change a supreme court ruling.

Nonetheless, it would be very nice for some kind of check to be placed on the supreme court, but I would much prefer it not be by congress by rather by the states. Perhaps having 2/3 of the state governments by themselves be able to overturn judicial rulings or something of the like (obviously the problem is the "states" themselves don't really meet together ... though the rulings aren't often and we are a pretty technologically advanced country).

Last edited by ThePanacea on Tue Mar 23, 2004 2:42 pm; edited 1 time in total

The House's check is every two years...