Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« GRITZ Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: SCOTUS Zig-Zags on National Injunctions Vs. Democracy, Birthright Citizenship

By: monkeytrots in GRITZ | Recommend this post (0)
Fri, 16 May 25 6:42 AM | 7 view(s)
Boardmark this board | Grits Breakfast of Champeens! 		Msg. 08392 of 08409
(This msg. is a reply to 08391 by De_Composed)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

>>> The SCOTUS can rule that what those courts have done is outside the realm of an "inferior" court.

Yes, they COULD rule that way. However they would have to rely on the 'establishing legislation' to back that opinion up. And that is the lynch pin they are lacking for legitimately making that ruling. Only Congress can do so.

Yes, they have recently ruled that a particular 'inferior court' lacked jurisdiction on a particular case, BUT ONLY because the enabling legislation for those 'inferior courts' showed that jurisdiction (for that case alone) belonged to a DIFFERENT 'inferior court'.




Avatar

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good ...

» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: SCOTUS Zig-Zags on National Injunctions Vs. Democracy, Birthright Citizenship
By: De_Composed in GRITZ
Fri, 16 May 25 6:38 AM 		Msg. 08391 of 08409

mt:

Re: “The structure, jurisdiction, and number of these lower courts are left to Congress's discretion.”Good catch. Congress can set up as many lower courts as it wants, but they're inferior. The SCOTUS can rule that what those courts have done is outside the realm of an "inferior" court. The excerpt you've provided seems to back THAT up.

« GRITZ Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next