Timeline for Who would declare a law unconstitutional if the Supreme Court couldn't?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 28, 2018 at 16:10 | comment | added | xuhdev | If you meant explicitly stripping Supreme Court's jurisdiction, then it still does apply, and the Wikipedia page also briefly touched it. | |
| Dec 28, 2018 at 16:04 | comment | added | xuhdev | If there is no court available to file the initial petition to, Supreme Court is certainly affected. | |
| Dec 28, 2018 at 14:36 | vote | accept | Christopher King | ||
| Dec 28, 2018 at 14:31 | comment | added | Christopher King | @xuhdev because jurisdiction stripping doesn't apply to the Supreme Court | |
| Dec 28, 2018 at 8:10 | comment | added | xuhdev | Why is your scenario different from jurisdiction stripping? Seems to me, "It is illegal for the Supreme Court to try this particular law in court." is no difference from "the Supreme Court shall not try this particular law in court." If Supreme Court acts, then it violates the statute no matter which version Congress adopted. | |
| Jan 11, 2018 at 4:11 | comment | added | user662852 | South Carolina did this. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinance_of_Nullification | |
| Jan 10, 2018 at 23:30 | answer | added | ohwilleke | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jan 10, 2018 at 23:23 | comment | added | Christopher King | @NateEldredge Interesting. The main difference between my scenario and Jurisdiction stripping is that Jurisdiction stripping is an expressly legal power of Congress, whereas in my question Congress is explicitly doing something illegal (and my question is who has the right to stop them). | |
| Jan 10, 2018 at 23:20 | comment | added | Nate Eldredge | Relevant: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction_stripping | |
| Jan 10, 2018 at 23:13 | history | asked | Christopher King | CC BY-SA 3.0 |