Justice, Politics, SCOTUS, Supreme Court

Rep. Steve King Proposes Bill To Prevent Supreme Court From Citing Its Own Precedent

Amendment or GTFO, Steve King.

By  
on
Steve King

Steve King

It’s going to be like this for a while, folks. For at least a little bit, we’re going to have to endure Congressional Republicans at all levels acting like their 28-year-old stepmother died before their 80-year-old father, ensuring unfettered access to the inheritance.

Republicans will be making some dumb proclamations during this time of consequences, but you’ll be hard pressed to find people who will top Iowa Congressman Steve King. Giving power to Steve King is like giving a boy who rips the wings off of flies a magnifying glass. Yesterday, he proved it. From his own office:

King Introduces Bill to Prohibit Supreme Court from Citing Obamacare

Obamacare should be ripped out by the roots and thus, I have introduced this legislation in conjunction with my repeal bill in an effort to look ahead and bar the Supreme Court from citing Obamacare in forthcoming decisions as binding precedent.

We know Republicans like gag orders for doctors, but trying to muzzle the Supreme Court seems a bit much.

The actual proposed bill cites what legal authority King thinks he has:

Under Article 3, Section 2, which allows Congress to provide exceptions and regulations for Supreme Court consideration of cases and controversies, the following cases are barred from citation for the purpose of precedence in all future cases after enactment:

Sponsored

For those playing along at home, here is the Article 3, Section 2 language King must be thinking about when he makes his wild claims:

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.

Constitutional scholars and people who can read English interpret that text as giving Congress some power to define the jurisdiction of the Court. To jump from there to telling the Court which previously decided cases it can look at isn’t just a stretch, it’s bats**t craziness.

(It also raises separation-of-powers issues. And while we’re here, the precedents King wants the Court to ignore are actually GOOD for conservatives! Has he even read these cases?”)

There is one way and only one way for Congress to dictate to the Supreme Court to ignore prior precedent. The procedure is in Article 5. You might have heard of it:

Sponsored

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

Look, I get Republicans right now. Being drunk with power is kind of fun. But the Constitution is pretty clear on this issue. Amendment or GTFO, Steve King.

King Introduces Bill to Prohibit Supreme Court from Citing Obamacare [SteveKing.gov]
GOP Bill Would Ban Supreme Court From Citing Its Own Obamacare Cases [Talking Points Memo]

Elie Mystal is an editor of Above the Law and the Legal Editor for More Perfect. He can be reached @ElieNYC on Twitter, or at elie@abovethelaw.com. He will resist.

Topics

, , , , , , , , , , , ,