> That’s the purpose of the Supreme Court: a check on the legislature and executive branches.
This is correct, but not intended to be the source of law(1). In fact, Supreme Court decisions aren't a law per se, but a deterrent in creating legally questionable situations.
(1)A Supreme Court decision is made moot by legislation, as per any law, but the deterrent is significantly weaker in practice than a written law as it's scrutinized more closely as a matter of interpretation, court makeup, and public opinion.
> (1)A Supreme Court decision is made moot by legislation, as per any law
Minor nitpick: Not all decisions can be overridden by law. Cases dealing with constitutionality particularly. If the Supreme Court says something is a Constitutional right, only two things can overturn it: (1) a Constitutional Amendment, and (2) another Supreme Court decision[a].
[a] Brown v. Board, for example, overturned Plessy v. Ferguson[b]
[b] Well, not exactly. They didn’t say they were overturning that decision, but it made the old one moot by saying the opposite of it (leading to the same result).
And when those written laws are unconstitutional? That’s the purpose of the Supreme Court: a check on the legislature and executive branches.
> That’s the purpose of the Supreme Court: a check on the legislature and executive branches.
This is correct, but not intended to be the source of law(1). In fact, Supreme Court decisions aren't a law per se, but a deterrent in creating legally questionable situations.
(1)A Supreme Court decision is made moot by legislation, as per any law, but the deterrent is significantly weaker in practice than a written law as it's scrutinized more closely as a matter of interpretation, court makeup, and public opinion.
> (1)A Supreme Court decision is made moot by legislation, as per any law
Minor nitpick: Not all decisions can be overridden by law. Cases dealing with constitutionality particularly. If the Supreme Court says something is a Constitutional right, only two things can overturn it: (1) a Constitutional Amendment, and (2) another Supreme Court decision[a].
[a] Brown v. Board, for example, overturned Plessy v. Ferguson[b]
[b] Well, not exactly. They didn’t say they were overturning that decision, but it made the old one moot by saying the opposite of it (leading to the same result).
1 reply →
Which invariably need interpretation and evaluation for consistency; hence a court with oversight.