this post was submitted on 13 May 2025
126 points (98.5% liked)
United States | News & Politics
3077 readers
1596 users here now
Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.
If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.
Rules
Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.
Post anything related to the United States.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Based on what part of the constitution? Congress has the right to define the scope of judicial authority as far as I am aware. That actually is the separation of powers. Congress is elected and judges aren't. Judicial review is not in the US constitution at all. I don't know about the Texas constitution.
You're not the first person to say this to me. I don't know where you're getting that idea. Judicial review is a direct conclusion of Article III, Section 2:
When I take a case to the court, claiming the legislature is violating my constitutional rights, the court has to determine jurisdiction: Whether they are allowed to hear the case. Legislation purports to deny them jurisdiction over such a case; Article III specifically grants them jurisdiction over all cases.
When they conflict, Article III supersedes legislation. Here, that constitutes judicial review.
There's a state/federal argument to be made, but not a separation of powers argument. The Texas constitution has similar language. For this provision of the bill to survive, SCOTUS (Or, more accurately, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals) will have to refuse certain powers they are explicitly granted, in favor of limitations prescribed by another branch.
The politicians that are coming up with this shit are getting the idea from where they get all their ideas: that's how they want things to be and so they will declare it is so. Until they have a majority on the court but a minority in congress, when their opinion will shift in the most dramatic fashion and they will pretend to have never heard of any of this.
I don't know who you think "they" is, but the "they" to which I belong is currently out of power in all three branches. I don't change my opinions for convenience. You don't know me so please stfu about things you have no way of knowing.
I apologize, when I said "they" I wasn't referring to you, although I can see now my reply makes it look that way - I was referring to the Texas politicians (and when I looked it up, I discovered that even Federal politicians are entertaining this idea) - "they" are just making shit up because it suits them basically.
Sorry, again, didn't mean anything at all directed at you.
Edit: edited my original post to try and be more clear
Cool. I guess I was a little harsh and assuming there myself. That's my bad.