Supreme Court Can Not Make Law

From the U.S. Constitution – Article I, Section 1.

All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

The above clearly means that Congress is the only part of the government that can make new laws or change existing laws, NOT the Supreme Court.  So, does it not make sense that the Supreme Court can only ISSUE opinion?  Yes.  And opinions are not laws.  Only A statement of the Court’s thoughts on a considered subject.  Not law.

From the  U.S. Constitution – Article VI, clause 2

1. The supremacy clause of the federal Constitution (Art. VI, clause 2)  “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”   Supreme Court “opinions” are NOT part of that supreme law.

2. Supreme court opinions are not “law” — they are OPINIONS on the cases [rightly or wrongly] before the Court. The ONLY ONLY ONLY federal law in this land is: The Constitution, Laws made by Congress which are permitted by the Constitution, and Treaties made by the President and the Senate which are permitted by the Constitution.

Supreme Court opinions are NOT LAW.

3. But the statists have managed to convince most Americans that the Supreme Court is THE highest law making body in the entire Country. If people would only read our federal Constitution and use their heads, they would have seen through this absurd claim 100 years ago. – Publius Huldah

Click here to read: “Supreme Court Offers Opinion, Doesn’t Make Law” by the Tenth Amendment Center.

Click here to read: “Who Let the Supreme Court make Law?”

I, Fremont V Brown III, have found that when discussing the subject that the Supreme Court can not make Law with Legislators I get the reply “JURISPRUDENCE” in their argument against my statement.

But, what is “JURISPRUDENCE”?  Well, according to: it is: “The philosophy of law, or the science which treats of the principles of positive law and legal relations. “The term is wrongly applied to actual systems of law, or to current views of law, or to suggestions for its amendment, but is the name of a science. This science is a formal, or analytical, rather than a material, one. It is the science of actual or positive law. It is wrongly divided into ‘general’ and ‘particular,’ or into ‘philosophical’ and ‘historical.’ It may therefore be deigned as the formal science of positive law.” Ho 11. Jur. 12. In the proper sense of the word, “jurisprudence” is the science of law, namely, that science which has for its function to ascertain the principles on which legal rules are based, so as not only to classify those rules in their proper order, and show the relation in which they stand to one another, but also to settle the manner in which new or doubtful cases should be brought under the appropriate rules. Jurisprudence is more a formal than a material science. It has no direct concern with questions of moral or political policy, for they fall under the province of ethics and legislation; but, when a new or doubtful case arises to which two different rules seem, when taken literally, to be equally applicable, it may be, and often is, the function of jurisprudence to consider the ultimate effect which would be produced if each rule were applied to an indefinite number of similar cases, and to choose that rule which, when so applied, will produce the greatest advantage to the community. Sweet.”

Well folks, as far as I can see it is NOT part of the Constitution, “The Supreme Law” and does NOT VOID nor does it have any BEARING on the fact that only Congress has the power to make law.