i'd like to see a scholarly analysis but i don't think III.2 means Congress can cut things entirely from SCOTUS review.
-
-
-
En réponse à @sarahjeong
the structure would indicate an ability to expand original jurisdiction, not to cut out jurisdiction entirely.
1 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @Ugarles
it looks potentially ambiguous to me, but it would be absurd for SCOTUS to agree with King
2 réponses 0 Retweet 0 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
yes, though who knows what a judiciary-hobbling court would do if given the power to cripple themselves
1 réponse 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @Ugarles
we live in a post-common-sense world, so i'm not going to completely dismiss the possibility marbury gets overturned
1 réponse 0 Retweet 2 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
the case Noah cited was post-Marbury and SCOTUS let itself get kneecapped so who is to say it's a conflict!
1 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aime
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.