Fri Nov 08, 2002, 05:11pm
|
|
Administrator
|
|
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toledo, Ohio, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,074
|
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by hawkk
The Supreme Court regularly interprets statutes (and occaisonally agency rules), and Congress (or the agency) is free to revise those statutes (or rules) to "change," the Supreme Court decision. . . . Also, on rare occaisons, lower courts have essentially said that a Supreme Court decision was "stale" and no longer good law even though it was never actually reversed by the Supreme Court. But this is very rare and requires very old opinions that have been ignored by the Supreme Court since they were issued.
|
This last point is very interesting, hawk. Thanks for pointing it out. Can you think of an example? I'm no constitutional scholar, by any stretch. I'm working from my memories of 8th grade American Gov't class 
As for the first point about "changing" a Supreme Court decision, I don't think that's a fair description. Congress may revise parts of a law that have been found to be unconstitutional. But that is changing the law, not the high court's decision. They are simply making the law constitutional; they are not enforcing the law despite it's unconstitutional status. Right?
Chuck
|
Chuck,
Your comments explain the point I was trying to make in a much clearer manner that I did. Thank you.
MTD, Sr.
__________________
Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Trumbull Co. (Warren, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Wood Co. (Bowling Green, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Ohio Assn. of Basketball Officials
International Assn. of Approved Bkb. Officials
Ohio High School Athletic Association
Toledo, Ohio
|