# Could Congress Muzzle the Supreme Court? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [September 1, 2014, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147 "2014-09-01T14:16:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Alley\_Dweller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alley_dweller/32/430_2.png) [@Alley\_Dweller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alley_Dweller)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2014, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/21 "2014-09-01T22:51:35Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > And of course SCOTUS has the power to “interpret” the law, so any defunding could be ruled unconstitutional as an abuse of the Congressional spending power. Which would leave the Secretary of the Treasury in a very awkward situation: Does he disburse money from the Treasury without a Congressional appropriation in defiance of the Constitution or does he risk being held in contempt of Court? If he is held in contempt of court, does the Attorney General order federal agents to arrest him or does he thumb his nose at the Court? This is the same question that comes up from time to time: What if everyone in Washington went berserk? Is there anything to stop them? The answer is no. Our government has survived this long because everyone has more or less played by the rules. They did what the Constitution says (more or less) and when something didn’t go their way, they settled their differences lawfully. But if the generals in the Pentagon decided to follow the example of their brethren in Egypt and depose the socialist Muslim Kenyan President, declare martial law, and put themselves in charge, there are no court rulings or Congressional resolutions that could stop them. The country could devolve into chaos, but as long as the troops remained loyal to the generals, nothing could stop them. ---
**Author:** ![buddy431](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6a8cbe/32.png) [@buddy431](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buddy431)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2014, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/22 "2014-09-01T23:04:47Z")
The other branches would just ignore the court’s decisions. [It’s happened before](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Merryman). The courts rely on other parts of the government to enforce their rulings, and if they refuse, what recourse is there? ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2014, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/23 "2014-09-01T23:15:09Z")
And if the Joint Chiefs decided to declare themselves Queens, who would stop them? Really. C’mon, people. We operate by rule of law, and nobody is going to go nutso and trash everything without everybody else stomping them into the dirt most quickly. If you upset the established powers, you will find yourself very dead very quickly, or marginalized even faster. There isn’t going to be any over-stepping of the rules, because whoever does that risks all their goodies, and nobody has that kind of balls. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2014, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/24 "2014-09-01T23:36:14Z")
> [@buddy431](#): > > The other branches would just ignore the court’s decisions. [It’s happened before](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Merryman). The courts rely on other parts of the government to enforce their rulings, and if they refuse, what recourse is there? Technically, that wasn’t a Supreme Court decision. It was a judicial order issued by Chief Justice Taney. There had been no court hearing on the issue and the majority of justices sided with Lincoln when Taney made it an issue. Congress did also and enacted a law confirming Lincoln’s actions. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/25 "2014-09-02T00:06:11Z")
First, where does judicial review come from? I think there is a clear, if not explicit, mandate in the constitution. I forget the exact wording, but it goes something like "This constitution, laws, treaties,…,passed **pursuant thereto** are the supreme law of the land. When the court declares a law unconstitutional, it is saying in effect that was not passed pursuant thereto. At least, that’s how I understand it. Second, Congress could impeach one or more justices. Third, they could enlarge “pack” the court. Finally, they could restrict jurisdiction in any way, except where the court has original jurisdiction. What there is no control over is if congress goes off the deep end. Laws could be declared unconstitutional, but failure to pass necessary laws? Suppose there is no budget and no money to pay the court? Or to pay for mandated functions? A much more serious problem. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/26 "2014-09-02T00:56:04Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > First, where does judicial review come from? I think there is a clear, if not explicit, mandate in the constitution. I forget the exact wording, but it goes something like "This constitution, laws, treaties,…,passed **pursuant thereto** are the supreme law of the land. When the court declares a law unconstitutional, it is saying in effect that was not passed pursuant thereto. At least, that’s how I understand it. It’s the way we do it here in the United States but it’s the only obvious way. The United Kingdom, for example, does not have an equivalent of a Supreme Court that can overturn primary legislation. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/27 "2014-09-02T03:35:16Z")
> [@Alley\_Dweller](#): > > Perhaps the Justices would show up. But how about the clerks, assistants, secretaries, bailiffs, security staff, messengers, janitors, mechanics, groundskeepers? Would the power company keep the lights on if they weren’t being paid? Would the internet provider keep providing internet? Would the phone company keep the phones on? Would the copier rental company leave their machines in place so they could distribute copies of their opinions? The justices could take turns meeting in each other’s living rooms. They can type up their decisions on computers they already own, and e-mail it to the media through the Wifi at Starbucks. They are not paupers who depend on their salary from payday to payday. The quality of their decisions might suffer, but that is a burden to be borne by a citizenry who elects Congressmen to defund the process, ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/28 "2014-09-02T06:02:38Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > First, where does judicial review come from? I think there is a clear, if not explicit, mandate in the constitution. I forget the exact wording, but it goes something like "This constitution, laws, treaties,…,passed **pursuant thereto** are the supreme law of the land. When the court declares a law unconstitutional, it is saying in effect that was not passed pursuant thereto. At least, that’s how I understand it. [Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison): > [@Wikipedia](#): > > Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court formed the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States under Article III of the Constitution. The landmark decision helped define the boundary between the constitutionally separate executive and judicial branches of the American form of government. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/29 "2014-09-02T06:07:23Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > But it does prove an argument that small government conservatives have made for decades: any authority will try to increase its reach and power. Generally, the only check on that is ANOTHER authority who feels that its toes are being stepped on. **The founders must have realized this, thus the checks and balances built into the system.** They didn’t merely “must have realized” this. Rather, this is quite explicitly argued in The Federalist Papers. (Federalist #51, I think.) [The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments](http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa51.htm) ---
**Author:** ![rowrrbazzle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rowrrbazzle/32/414_2.png) [@rowrrbazzle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rowrrbazzle)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2014, 6:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/30 "2014-09-02T06:42:10Z")
Worried about Congress? FDR tried a radical move on the Court, and Congress said, “Nuh-uh”. [Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937 - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Procedures_Reform_Bill_of_1937) ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2014, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/31 "2014-09-03T19:45:11Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > The justices could take turns meeting in each other’s living rooms. Many people don’t realize there wasn’t a Supreme Court Building until 1935. Prior to that, the Court used to meet in various places, most often in a Senate assembly room. ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2014, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/32 "2014-09-03T23:18:22Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > I’d like to think that my Supreme Court would still show up for work Monday morning, even if there were no funds to pay them. If I didn’t think they would, I’d have no respect for them or their integrity. They are all independently wealthy enough. They have sworn an oath to serve. > > During the Second World War, thousands of Americans served in high ranking professional office for a dollar a year. Yes, but, I think if you check the numbers, they made millions upon millions with patronage, contracts, exchanges of influence, etc… Could be wrong, but, that’s what I’m thinking. ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2014, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147/33 "2014-09-03T23:19:23Z")
> [@rowrrbazzle](#): > > Worried about Congress? FDR tried a radical move on the Court, and Congress said, “Nuh-uh”. [Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937 - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Procedures_Reform_Bill_of_1937) That was because Congress disagreed w/FDR, not because of their great regard for the SC. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-congress-muzzle-the-supreme-court/697147.md?page=1)