In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I talk about the absurd, fallacious concept of absolute judicial supremacy.

[soundcloud url=”https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/242019844″ params=”color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false” width=”100%” height=”166″ iframe=”true” /]

Most Americans believe the Supreme Court enjoys absolute supremacy in the American political system. After all, the word “supreme” is right in the name. They believe when the Supreme Court offers an opinion, it carries the weight of gospel. If the SCOTUS rules something “constitutional,” its edict makes it so.

But the founding generation never intended to create an all-powerful federal tribunal to rule over us all – an oligarchy composed of nine politically connected lawyers.

In this episode of Thoughts from Maharrey Head, I dissect the fallacious idea of absolute judicial supremacy and show that it simply doesn’t make sense within the political framework the founding generation intended to establish. I explain why allowing the allowing the Supreme Court to have the final say in constitutionality is absurd and who should really decide.

You can subscribe to Thoughts from Maharrey Head on iTunes. Just click HERE.

SHOW NOTES AND LINKS

James Madison’s Report of 1800 – In this report, Madison explains who determines the extent of federal power in the last resort and why.

Thomas Jefferson letter to William Jarvis – Jefferson explains the danger of considering “judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions”

“Dangerous powers, not delegated, may not only be usurped and executed by the other departments, but that the judicial department also may exercise or sanction dangerous powers beyond the grant of the Constitution.” – James Madison

Mike Maharrey