It is my understanding that when a law is passed, the supreme court has the power to review it and decide whether or not it is constitutional. Now do they just get to choose what they review and don't? For example, did they just get to choose that they wanted to review the Patriot Act, or did something have to happen first? And I am correct in believing that the supreme court can open up laws from the past at any time? How does this work? Does one of the justices say, there was that law passed a while back, and it is unconstitutional, let's review it, and then it is reviewed?
And what if a state law is unconstitutional? Is the state supreme court the only one allowed to review it? What if they don't strike it down as unconstitutional? Can the supreme court step in and do this? And how is this done? Does one of the justices just say, "Hey. That law down in Alabama is unconstitutional, let's review it."
And what if a state law is unconstitutional? Is the state supreme court the only one allowed to review it? What if they don't strike it down as unconstitutional? Can the supreme court step in and do this? And how is this done? Does one of the justices just say, "Hey. That law down in Alabama is unconstitutional, let's review it."
Comment