Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1

    Congress Wants To Give Itself The Power To Reverse Supreme Court Decisions And Kill T

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.3920:/

    Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 (Introduced in House)

    HR 3920 IH

    108th CONGRESS

    2d Session

    H. R. 3920

    To allow Congress to reverse the judgments of the United States Supreme Court.

    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

    March 9, 2004

    Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky (for himself, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. EVERETT, Mr. POMBO, Mr. COBLE, Mr. COLLINS, Mr. GOODE, Mr. PITTS, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. HEFLEY, Mr. DOOLITTLE, and Mr. KINGSTON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

    A BILL

    To allow Congress to reverse the judgments of the United States Supreme Court.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

    SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the `Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004'.

    SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL REVERSAL OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS.

    The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a judgment of the United States Supreme Court--

    (1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the enactment of this Act; and

    (2) to the extent that judgment concerns the constitutionality of an Act of Congress.

    SEC. 3. PROCEDURE.

    The procedure for reversing a judgment under section 2 shall be, as near as may be and consistent with the authority of each House of Congress to adopt its own rules of proceeding, the same as that used for considering whether or not to override a veto of legislation by the President.

    SEC. 4. BASIS FOR ENACTMENT.

    This Act is enacted pursuant to the power of Congress under article III, section 2, of the Constitution of the United States.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    1,571
    Wow. Talk about blatantly unconstitutional. I'm sure this won't pass though.
    -Mooneer
    Thoughtbug Software: Hosting shouldn't require any thought.
    Legitimate host? Support the Code of Ethical Conduct

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Fairfax, Virginia
    Posts
    6,835
    If this passes through, I will not know what to think about America...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    1,310
    What ever happened to the separation between the justice system and politics?

    Isn't that one of THE most fundamental parts of a democracy?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    6,627
    Of course this will never go anywhere, and the fact that it's sitting in subcommittee with only 25 co-sponsors (and not big names) shows that it's not. But you have to wonder, if it did pass... and the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional... and the first Congressional vote under it would be the the reverse the law itself. Hey, did John Grisham think this thing up?

    Anyway... so here's a bill supported a bunch of Republicans (all of the sponsors are, although Congressional watchers may recognize one who switched parties a few years back) saying in essense that the idea of checks and balances between the branches of government doesn't work for them... isn't this the party that talks about the primacy of the Constitution?

    What a bunch of maroons. I tell you, these guys in Congress just crack me up.
    Specializing in SEO and PPC management.

  6. #6
    The way the government is setup is not the way it was origionally created. John Marshall gave the supreme court a lot of the power it has with judicial review.

    This doesn't necessarily mean the framers of the constitution didn't want the supreme court to have power, it's just that they didn't include it in the constituion.
    * Best Web Hosting - Submit your host to our directory and become one of our top 10 web hosts.

  7. #7
    Originally posted by Pilgrim
    What ever happened to the separation between the justice system and politics?

    Isn't that one of THE most fundamental parts of a democracy?
    There isn't any. The politicians appoint them. The ones appointed are the ones that best fit the person in power's viewpoints.
    www.square-network.com www.squarenetwork.com
    Now available in regular and dehyphenated.
    May 2003 Member of the Month
    Useless Community Liason Ever Since.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    1,310
    Hmm, yes. Now that you mentioned it... Forgot all about it but ofcourse when the supreme court had to review the case of the Florida votes law had little to do with it.

    It was republican judges against democratic judges and the party with the most judges would probably win.

    And the world watched in amazement...


    It's actually pretty darn scary!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    598
    Pack your bags, buy a heavy jacket and move up North to Canada, there's a lot less government drama up here

    Oh, and this will never pass.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    3,727
    What a joke, honestly. Unconstitutional is the word.
    Have you Floble'd today?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,670
    It makes me wonder why people vote for these reps to begin with. They are wasting tax $$$ to try and give themselves absolute authority.

    Sad....

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,030
    Originally posted by Matt
    It makes me wonder why people vote for these reps to begin with. They are wasting tax $$$ to try and give themselves absolute authority.

    Sad....
    They pull out an entirely different mask upon moving to Washington... It all seems like it's a game to some of them
    CybexHost.com - Shared and Reseller Hosting Solutions on cPanel/WHM Linux Servers
    ModernTweak.com - Discount ModernBill Licenses, Hosted Installations, and Professional Services
    :: Pay for your discount ModernBill license with PayPal
    :: admin[at]cybexhost.com :: AIM: CybexH

  13. #13
    These guys that sponsored this bill should be drug out into the street and shot as they are more dangerous than any terrorist.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington
    Posts
    9,576
    Originally posted by Matt
    absolute authority.
    There seems to be a lot of that going on nowdays, and to be honest, those two words scare the poop out of me when it comes to the government.
    Former Webhost... now, just a guy.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    351
    This whole thing just makes me crack up. The best part is the primary lobbiests to get this bill put up, The Christian Coalition (Check their web page for confirmation). It's hillarious how much gull some of these far-religious-right morons have.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    2,194
    The judiciary interprets and rules depending upon laws as written.

    Do they have the right to misinterpret and essentially change the laws or even make up new laws when they deem it necessary?

    I'm for keeping the three branches of government and their responsibilities separated. How about you?

  17. #17
    constitutional or unconstitutional,I am not sure.

    But on the other side it is a well know fact that if you (and your lobbiest) cannot get your agenda thru congress/senate,then you take it to court where it winds up in front of these men who decides if it is legal or not and there by making it a law,depending on THEIR decisions.Did you get to vote for any of theses guys? Why are they thru the judical process making laws(by their decsions)?They have too much power

    thats UNconstitutional

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    1,571
    Originally posted by grace5
    constitutional or unconstitutional,I am not sure.

    But on the other side it is a well know fact that if you (and your lobbiest) cannot get your agenda thru congress/senate,then you take it to court where it winds up in front of these men who decides if it is legal or not and there by making it a law,depending on THEIR decisions.Did you get to vote for any of theses guys? Why are they thru the judical process making laws(by their decsions)?They have too much power

    thats UNconstitutional
    You push a Constitutional amendment through that adds checks and balances to the judiciary, then. You don't blatantly violate the Constitution.
    -Mooneer
    Thoughtbug Software: Hosting shouldn't require any thought.
    Legitimate host? Support the Code of Ethical Conduct

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    United States of America
    Posts
    1,838
    Originally posted by Pilgrim
    What ever happened to the separation between the justice system and politics?

    Isn't that one of THE most fundamental parts of a democracy?
    H E L L O

    words taken out of my mouth!
    Computer Steroids - Full service website development solutions since 2001.
    (612)234-2768 - Locally owned and operated in the Minneapolis, Minnesota area.

  20. #20
    Im not the smartest man or anything, but doesn't this mess up the whole Checks and Balances thing?
    Money is the root of all evil. So if you don't want to go crazy, give it all to me

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    1,239
    This doesn't surprise me. Every year thousands of bills are introduced and many of them are very far fetched like this one.

    Don't worry..it's not going to pass. =)
    TradeViceroy

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •