too many holes in the fence

[garrettwombat]

why is it that the supreme court gets to interpret the constitution when it is very self-evident with what is written in the constitution?

why is it that we can amend the constitution?


why did our founders leave the possibility for tyranny to come in?
they should have known better:mad:

[JordanQ72]

So you think the power to strike down laws as unconstitutional should rest where? The executive? Have some sort of special double-veto which Congress can't overrule?


why is it that we can amend the constitution?

That should have a self-evident answer looking over the amendments and considering the mistakes that went into the first draft

[AFM]

The supreme court's ability to judge laws as constitutional/unconstitutional is not in the Constitution. They usurped that power for themselves.

[JordanQ72]

The supreme court's ability to judge laws as constitutional/unconstitutional is not in the Constitution. They usurped that power for themselves.

I don't know, I've read it, I believe it is. What's your interpretation then? Who holds that power? No one? As long as Congress passes a law and a President signs it, it must be constitutional?