There is always the possibility that the lawmakers (in this case congress) will create a law that is fundamentally in contradiction with the established corpus of constitutional law. It is only right that there exists a body whose role it is to test that. In our country, it is the High Court - my guess is that the Supreme Court is the equivalent in the USA. A similar arrangement presumably exists in other democracies, and is essential for good government, so get used to it.
The High court cannot create law, so does not "rule the country", but it can review law for consistency, particularly with the constitution. In our country, the constitution can only change by referendum, which succeeds only very rarely. In the event of a standoff between the lawmakers and the law interpreters, we have a third arm of the government (essentially an extension of the monarchy) that has the power to fire or veto. This role is in essence held by the US president, although with some differences, it would seem, given the government shutdown just experienced. On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 04:20:00PM -0500, Richard Ruquist wrote: > Chief Supreme Court Justice Marshall usurped the Constitution > when he maintained that the Supreme Court had the right to rule > laws made by Congress and signed by the President unconstitutional. > As a result the USA is essentially ruled by the Supreme Court > > There is no provision in the US Constitution for this right. > Congress instead has the right to regulate the Supreme Court, > > Ie.: > > ARTICLE III > > - > Text<http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii?quicktabs_10=0#quicktabs-10> > - Learn > More<http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii?quicktabs_10=1#quicktabs-10> > > SECTION 1. > > The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme > Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time > ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, > shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, > receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished > during their continuance in office. > SECTION 2. > > 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<http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxi>;--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. > > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 3:35 PM, John Mikes <jami...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Telmo wrote: > > > > > > > > *"I admire the US constitution too. In fact, my political position is > > essentially to follow it (although I like to imagine possibilities for > > **peaceful > > world with further increases in freedom)*." > > > > Which Constitution? the one epoch-opening chef-d'oeuvre based on > > modernized medieval ideas of those well educated smoking-duelling > > slave-owner male chauvinist Forefathers, > > who just did not want to pay taxes to the King of England, or the later > > "amended" versions of the same obsolete construct making it into a > > gun-toting killer - corrupt, faith-ruled money-monger (with SOME > > exceptions, thank you). > > > > I join you in admiring the original one - as a relic, an innovation > > historical masterpiece FOR THE 18th CENTURY. Not for the 21st. > > My admiration stopped short when I realized the outcome: > > a 'special-interest money'-ruled anti-democratic conglomerate, *governing*a > > so called government into committing crimes (international and domestic) > > originally excluded > > from it's 'modus (regulatio) vivendi'. > > > > How can you imagine a 'peaceful' world with capitalistic (I call it: > > econo-feudalistic) principles, imperialistic (oil?) wars and forcing own > > interest on other countries? (Not to > > mention the availability of all level governance for enough money). > > > > JM > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Everything List" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. > > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.