Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!hplabs!hp-ses!hpcuhb!hpda!hpcuhc!hpsemc!jat
From: jat@hpsemc.HP.COM (Joe Talmadge)
Newsgroups: news.misc
Subject: Re: our government - was Re: Freedom of hate
Message-ID: <1860001@hpsemc.HP.COM>
Date: 8 May 89 22:39:51 GMT
References: <930@snjsn1.SJ.ATE.SLB.COM>
Organization: HP Technology Access Center, Cupertino, CA
Lines: 22

David Dyer-Bennet writes:
> In article <930@snjsn1.SJ.ATE.SLB.COM> grimesg@magic.UUCP (George Grimes) writes:
> :If I recall my 
> :college government correctly the supreme court wasn't even granted the 
> :authority to interpret the constitution.  
> 
> The purpose of the supreme court was to be the final arbiter of the law of
> the land.  The constitution is part of (the basis of!) the law of the land.
> QED.  

Nope.  Nowhere in the Constitution is the Supreme Court given the
power of judicial review.  The case that set the judicial review
precedent is Marbury vs. Madison (during the presidency of Thomas
Jefferson).  

I've moved this to misc.legal in case anyone has anything to add.
I'll provide more detail there if you want.


Joe Talmadge
hplabs!hpda!hpsemc!jat 
jat%hpsemc@hplabs.HP.COM