Difference between revisions of "Essay:The Supremacists"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Lordsservant (talk | contribs) m |
m (Reverted edits by Lordsservant (Talk); changed back to last version by EdBot) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''The Supremacists''' is a book by [[Phyllis Schlafly]] about the tyranny of [[judge]]s. Originally published in 2004, it was then expanded for its | + | '''The Supremacists''' is a book by [[Phyllis Schlafly]] about the tyranny of [[judge]]s. Originally published in 2004, it was then expanded for its paperback version in 2006. |
Additional examples and solutions for judicial tyranny have come to light since this book was published. Please contribute here to the growing list of new insights and examples of judicial supremacy: | Additional examples and solutions for judicial tyranny have come to light since this book was published. Please contribute here to the growing list of new insights and examples of judicial supremacy: | ||
Revision as of 11:25, August 13, 2008
The Supremacists is a book by Phyllis Schlafly about the tyranny of judges. Originally published in 2004, it was then expanded for its paperback version in 2006.
Additional examples and solutions for judicial tyranny have come to light since this book was published. Please contribute here to the growing list of new insights and examples of judicial supremacy:
- Congress initially did not even give federal question matter jurisdiction to federal courts
- For over 140 years, Congress felt it appropriate for the U.S. Supreme Court to be confined to the basement of the Capitol
- the U.S. Supreme Court did not have its own building until 1935, and then its activism began
- over 900 federal decisions have cited the Tax Injunction Act, which withdrew federal jurisdiction from state tax issues
- in Chance v. California, 389 U.S. 89 (1967) (per curiam), the U.S. Supreme Court held in favor of obscenity cite by granting certiorari and reversing the decision below without a decision by the California Supreme Court and without a decision even by a Court of Appeals in California. That is extremely unusual, and perhaps the only modern example of this.
One new suggestion for curbing judicial supremacy with respect to the citation of foreign law is for Congress to pass a law establishing evidentiary requirements before foreign practices or laws can be cited in federal court.