Between 1801 and 1835, under Chief Justice John Marshall, came United States Supreme Court decisions which, by declaring the relative powers of the nation and the State, disclosed the full significance of the Constitution as an instrument expressing the creating of a new nation, as well as demonstrating the power of the Supreme Court. In Marbury vs. Madison, decided in 1803, it was held that an Act of Congress repugnant to the Constitution was null and void. It was also decided that it was the function of the court to ascertain, in cases properly brought before it, whether repugnancy exists. This power of the courts, though often criticized, has never been shaken. In other words, when the United States Constitution, the nation’s highest law, is in conflict with an act of the legislature, that act is invalid.
According to lawnix.com, the US Supreme Court has the authority to review acts of Congress and determine whether they are unconstitutional and therefore void. It is emphatically the duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret the rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the Court must decide on the operation of each. If courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature, the Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.
With phone and pen, Obama has unilaterally changed Obamacare 33 times, and he’s not finished yet. Political hyperbole? I don’t think so. Something else is in play here. Obama’s attempt to intimidate the Congress could very well be his next step in trying to eliminate the November election. Don’t think it can happen? Who would have thought that in our lifetimes we would be denied our First Amendment rights? Who would have thought that in our lifetimes we would be profiled by Homeland Security as terrorists? Who would have thought that in our lifetimes we would experience, first-hand, the overt wheedling, cajoling, threats, and bribery (I think those are crimes) that the Democrats have employed to shove a piece of unconstitutional legislation that Congress did not even read down America’s throat?
Remember this? In a June, 2008 campaign speech, Obama said, “But what you don’t deserve is another election that’s governed by fear, and innuendo, and division. What you won’t hear from this campaign or this party is the kind of politics that uses religion as a wedge and patriotism as a bludgeon . . . What you won’t see from this campaign or this party is a politics that sees our opponents not as competitors to challenge, but enemies to polarize, because we may call ourselves Democrats and Republicans, but we are Americans first. We are always Americans first.” Who knows? Maybe we’ll hear this again . . . right before the next election that’s governed by fear, and innuendo, and division.