The Supreme Court Rules Itself Subject to Congress

Thought experiment:

Has the Supreme Court, through the 6-3 ruling in Gonzales v Raich subjected itself to Congressional authority?

1. The Supreme Court, by tearing down or upholding legislation, can have and has had a significant, substantial, and material affect on commerce in the United States.
   
2. This affect is felt on commerce that remains within state boundaries and commerce that crosses state boundaries.
   
3. The SCOTUS was established by the Constitution, the primary law of the land.
   
4. Congress and the President can pass whatever law they please and it cannot ultimately be abolished, torn down, dismantled or upheld, affirmed, protected until it reaches the SCOTUS. (I ignore civil disobedience.)
   
5. The SCOTUS just said it stands by the precedent that an act or an object that doesn't economically cross state lines can be ruled as interstate commerce.
   
6. Doesn't this mean SCOTUS rulings can be subject to the power of the Commerce Clause?
   
7. If so, doesn't that mean Congress and the President can pass a law that limits the power of the SCOTUS in certain cases, because that power can interfere with interstate commerce?

I ask this in jest, but with a serious point. Raich has made what was supposed to be a limit on federal power into a contemptible absurdity, one that makes the above line of thought far from unreasonable.

For a much lighter take on this joke of jurisprudence, see Fafblog's Fafnir and associated commenters, who manage to skewer this dumbass ruling in so many obvious and amusing ways I get even angrier thinking about it.

When you hold a ball in the air it has POTENTIAL commerce. When you let it go the potential commerce turns into KINETIC commerce, which makes it faaaaalllllll through the air! It is caught by Congress or gravity. Classroom Learning Challenge: Levy a tariff on the ball before it hits the ground!

Posted by Drizzten at June 10, 2005 03:13 PM