Okay, armchair lawyers (and real ones)...I need a lesson.

[Liberal Veteran]

According to an article posted, The Bugman of The House of Representatives wants to pass a law that prevents the Supreme Court from hearing cases involving gay marriage.

Is there something I am missing or is that illegal?

[DebJ]

1. my thoughts too...Supreme Court would call this second law

unconstitutional.

[unblock]

2. congress can pass and the president can sign whatever they want

but even inserting language that says "the supreme court can't review this" doesn't prevent the supreme court from reviewing it.

any federal law is reviewable by the supreme court if they wish to review it.

[Xithras]

3. That would take a Constitutional amendment

The powers of the Supreme Court are defined by the Constitution, and they were deliberately vague and wide ranging. Any attempt to limit the power of the Supreme Court would require a change to this charter...hence a constitutional amendment.

[merh]

4. IMHO - if you pass a law that states the supremes can't review

the law you are going to make them review it - they don't like people messing with their powers and responsibilities. I say - go for it and piss 'em off! (What idiots!)

[Cat Atomic]

5. Sounds like an attempt to make, "nonononono- INFINITY NO!" into a law.

Hehe. Pardon me.

[tabasco]

6. Congress has the power to limit Supreme Court jurisdiction.

They could probably do this.

State courts could still rule a federal law unconstitutional, but it would only affect that state.

That's how I understand it from law school but I know it's much more complicated.