ST Alpha - "So, is there any precedence for the Supreme Court to gut something so that Congress can *fix* it?" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 169

So, is there any precedence for the Supreme Court to gut something so that Congress can fix it?

Posted by Inigo (aka Inigo) Jun 26 '13, 11:56

Have they ever changed an act of Congress hoping it'll be fixed afterward?

That seems to go against the idea of checks and balances for each branch. IMO, their thinking should be that whatever they do sticks, and deal with the consequences of their ruling.

Responses:

Or, another example - Strongbad Jun 26, 11:58 3
- It is extremely common for the court to hold that there is a valid government interest but the statute is too broad and violates constitutional - pmb Jun 26, 12:05 1
  - [deleted]
- [deleted]
[deleted] 9
- I didn't mean they are the last word, but they should make their rulings like they are. - Inigo Jun 26, 11:59 8
  - [deleted] 7
    - But not in the VRA case? You're confuzzling me here. -- nm - Inigo Jun 26, 12:06 6
      - [deleted] 5
        
        Basically, they said "you can't do this" but left them breadcrumbs on how to fix it next time. -- nm - spamlet Jun 26, 12:11 4
        
        [deleted]
        
        The breadcrumbs were already there. Some were discussed during re-authorization in 2006. -- nm - Strongbad Jun 26, 12:12 1
        
        [deleted]
        
        [deleted]

Post a message top

So, is there any precedence for the Supreme Court to gut something so that Congress can *fix* it?

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.

So, is there any precedence for the Supreme Court to gut something so that Congress can fix it?