From: The Chief Instigator 

"John D.Wentzky"  writes:

>"No One"  wrote in message
>news:87fy7xiaj4.fsf{at}nospam.pacbell.net...
>> "John D.Wentzky"  writes:

>>> "thomas p."  wrote in message
>>> news:1174542611.921031.259270{at}l75g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>> > On 21 Mar., 18:23, "John D.Wentzky"

>>> > wrote:

>>> > And your point would be?  Nobody argued that they agreed with every
>>> > decision the court makes, only that the court has the right to
>>> > determine the constitutionality of laws in cases brought before it.

>>> They can only determine something to be unconstitutional if it
>>> violates the Constitution.  Check the Separation of powers
>>> requirement that was violated by the USSC in 1973 in roevwade.

>> "Separation of powers" does not mean "Wentzky agrees with the
>> decision."

>It means the USSC had no authority to override Texas' or any other State's
>non-roevwade position.

You're going on 200 years too late for that argument - which was settled by
Marbury v. Madison.

--
   Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick{at}io.com)  Houston, Texas
    chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php  (TCI's 2006-07 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
                 LAST GAME:  Houston 2, Manitoba 0 (March 21)
               NEXT GAME: Friday, March 23 vs. Rochester, 7:35

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag