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.

as they did, merely 15 years after the constitution was ratified

his presidency is just way too entertaining

but what else is there?

nobody then, and virtually nobody now, found it odd that you would ask the supreme court questions about the meaning of the constitution

You mean 9 unelected officials did as a power grab

you say unelected

Not the government as a whole

Not the people either

but when pressed, you said you preferred that they were unelected

so why say unelected

when _even you_ think it's better than the alternative?

the supreme court makes a decision, and that is enforced by the political party not in the matter and enforced via threats of not being elected into office

why would you want unelected officials determining your laws?

I'm saying I dislike judicial review

Not the scotus

well, that's fine