Congress, the Court, and the Constitution: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fifth Congress, Second Session, January 29, 1998U.S. Government Printing Office, 1999 - 149 páginas |
Dentro del libro
Resultados 1-5 de 16
Página
... exclusive focus of today's hearing is not the Court's Boerne v . Flores decision of last term , that case does represent the most recent expression of tension in an ongoing relationship be- tween the Congress and the Court . Despite the ...
... exclusive focus of today's hearing is not the Court's Boerne v . Flores decision of last term , that case does represent the most recent expression of tension in an ongoing relationship be- tween the Congress and the Court . Despite the ...
Página 17
... exclusive role on the meaning of the Constitu- tion . The Supreme Court frequently today cites language from Marbury that it is emphatically the province and duty of the courts to say what the law is ; that is true . It's also ...
... exclusive role on the meaning of the Constitu- tion . The Supreme Court frequently today cites language from Marbury that it is emphatically the province and duty of the courts to say what the law is ; that is true . It's also ...
Página 18
... exclusive interpreter of the Constitution , and that that would produce political stability . Neal Devins and I talked about that article as to when in American history you could ever say that the Court helped settle issues ...
... exclusive interpreter of the Constitution , and that that would produce political stability . Neal Devins and I talked about that article as to when in American history you could ever say that the Court helped settle issues ...
Página 19
... exclusively by Congress and the President . There were few decisions by federal courts to guide the elected branches . The record of this early period has been ably covered by David Currie in a number of law review arti- cles , brought ...
... exclusively by Congress and the President . There were few decisions by federal courts to guide the elected branches . The record of this early period has been ably covered by David Currie in a number of law review arti- cles , brought ...
Página 20
... exclusive and authoritative interpreter of the Constitution . Although they caution that their study is not based on historical precedents , they conclude that the Court is best situated to decide and settle constitutional issues ...
... exclusive and authoritative interpreter of the Constitution . Although they caution that their study is not based on historical precedents , they conclude that the Court is best situated to decide and settle constitutional issues ...
Otras ediciones - Ver todas
Términos y frases comunes
abortion ACLU action Alexander & Schauer Alexander and Schauer authority Bill of Rights branches of government CANADY Chairman Chief Justice child labor City of Boerne Clinton CONG CONGRES CONGRESS THE LIBRARY Congress's constitutional congressional constitutional interpretation constitutional judgments constitutional law constitutional questions constitutional rights constitutionality Court rulings Currie debate decided deference doctrine Dred Scott duty enact enforce example executive branch federal courts federal judges Federalist Flores Fourteenth Amendment framers Free Exercise Clause gress hear impeachment independent interpret the Constitution invalidate Jefferson judicial activism Judicial Exclusivity judicial power judicial review judicial supremacy judiciary judiciary nature jurisdiction LIBRA LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Louis Fisher Madison Marbury Marshall meaning Members of Congress ment Neal Devins opinion overturn passed President Professor prohibit provisions RARY RESS THE LIBRARY RFRA role Senate separation of powers Stat statement statute STROSSEN supra note Thank tion tional unconstitutional United uphold veto vote
Pasajes populares
Página 83 - The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts.
Página 5 - The Congress, the Executive and the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution. Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others.
Página 14 - Thus, the particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the Constitution is void; and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.
Página 42 - At the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the government upon vital questions, affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made, in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions, the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.
Página 5 - The opinion of the judges has no more authority over congress than the opinion of congress has over the judges, and on that point the president is independent of both. The authority of the supreme court must not, therefore, be permitted to control the congress or the executive, when acting in their legislative capacities, but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may deserve.
Página 17 - Deciding whether a matter has in any measure been committed by the Constitution to another branch of government, or whether the action of that branch exceeds whatever authority has been committed, is itself a delicate exercise in constitutional interpretation, and is a responsibility of this Court as ultimate interpreter of the Constitution.
Página 5 - You seem, in pages 84 and 148, to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is "boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem...
Página 53 - Therefore, congressional inertia, indifference or quiescence may sometimes, at least as a practical matter, enable, if not invite, measures on independent presidential responsibility. In this area, any actual test of power is likely to depend on the imperatives of events and contemporary imponderables rather than on abstract theories of law.
Página 102 - If two laws conflict with each other the courts must decide on the operation of each. So, if a law be in opposition to the Constitution; if both the law and the Constitution apply to a particular case, so that the court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution, or conformably to the Constitution, disregarding the law, the court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.
Página 18 - I think the modern doctrine of impeachment should yield to an appellate jurisdiction in the legislature. A reversal of those legal opinions deemed unsound by the legislature would certainly better comport with the mildness of our character than [would] a removal of the Judge who has rendered them unknowing of his fault.