Codes, do you have any written proof they were 'assholes' as you claim?

the Supreme Court is very small

such a good male feminist, believe all woman and all that BS

it only has nine people

yea its just biting him in the ass at this point

and one building

Or is that your unwritten interpertation?

Not small in terms of people

Small in terms of power

their sole power is to answer questions

@Malt_Hitman making me need to post a video from team america, lol

>believe all women
>says that his accuser is lying

the other branches can literally do whatever they'd like

the only power the supreme court has in that case is to browbeat them

the public knows more or less what the supreme court thinks about what the executive is doing

they can be like the loud annoying tattletale in the room as well 😉

and that's basically it

But checks and balances is not judicial review

...

You need to separate them

pretty sure that applies

so we're not allowed to ask the supreme court about the constitution?

They have the authority to rule on the people in Congress

Not on the laws that were pased

why not the president?

that seems like it kinda defeats the purpose of the judicial branch

^

surely they meant for the thing to exist

and serve some purpose

like maybe the purpose they said it was for

Yeah and I said it earlier

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii

May I ask what you both want to happen in this presidency

giving their opinion on questions of controversy

Decide on a case as an unbiased 3rd party

in which the U.S. is party

Trump 2020?

which would include something you could call judicial review

a lot of this requires two competing equally strong political parties so it's not like it's perfect

Not create laws by making shit unconstitutional because they seem it so

Triggering the Libs.