S.Res.108 - Affirming the rule of law and the legitimacy of judicial review. (119th Congress)
Summary
Senate Resolution 108 affirms the rule of law and the legitimacy of judicial review, referencing the Constitution's Article III and the Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison. It expresses concern over remarks suggesting the executive branch might disregard Federal court decisions. The resolution emphasizes the separation of powers and the necessity of executive branch compliance with court rulings to avoid a constitutional crisis.
Expected Effects
This resolution serves as a formal statement of the Senate's position on the importance of judicial review and adherence to court decisions. It is likely intended to reinforce the judiciary's authority and discourage any actions that could undermine it. The resolution may also influence public discourse and potentially constrain the executive branch's actions.
Potential Benefits
- Reinforces the principle of separation of powers.
- Upholds the authority of the judiciary.
- Protects the rule of law.
- Prevents potential constitutional crises.
- Reaffirms commitment to established legal precedent.
Potential Disadvantages
- May be perceived as a partisan rebuke of the executive branch.
- Could exacerbate tensions between the legislative and executive branches.
- The resolution itself has no legal binding and is merely a statement of opinion.
- Potential for the resolution to be interpreted as an overreach of legislative power.
- May not effectively deter the executive branch from disregarding court rulings if they are determined to do so.
Constitutional Alignment
The resolution aligns with Article III of the U.S. Constitution, which vests judicial power in the Supreme Court and inferior courts established by Congress. It also implicitly references the Supremacy Clause (Article VI), which establishes the Constitution and federal laws as the supreme law of the land. The resolution's emphasis on judicial review is rooted in the interpretation of the Constitution established in Marbury v. Madison.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).