Can the U.S. Supreme Court changed law or only overturn?
340101
The Supreme Court hears arguments from both parties to the case.  A party may decide to use public opinion as part of their argument, but decisions on constitutional questions are typically decided based on the text of the constitution, the historical reasons for adopting the provision in question & previous decisions of the United States Supreme Court.  Decisions from lower courts, both state and federal, are relevant considerations, but it's not necessary for them to decide.
790702
YES, a Presidential Veto can be overridden -- it takes a 2/3rds majority vote from BOTH houses to override a Presidential Veto.
892718
state laws overrule federal
677007
I am a 3rd year law student and the answer is pretty much "yes". After a long line of cases after the Burger Court, the Court has been very deferential to allowing Congress to regulate activities "affecting, involved in or substantially affecting" interstate commerce. There are certain situations where it would be blantatly out of Congress's power to regulate (like something purely intrastate) but for the most part, Congress can regulate about any activity that has a substantial affect on interstate commerce.
933101
Can I get 10 pts if no one responds? \n\nYou gotta write about the balance of powers. How Supreme Court rules over the Congress.
818777
Excellent question.  Any proposed change that would violate our State Constitution, must be presented to the people so the majority can decide whether or not that constitutional change should be made.  Proposed laws, that don't change the constitution can be voted on in Lansing by our lawmakers.  Hope this helps you understand.
1092291
Determined by supreme court case.
695379
Appellate jurisdiction is available to all courts excepting the Supreme Court. \nAppellate jurisdiction is just a simple way of saying that a normal ruling can be appealed (if approved by a higher court) and then will be heard by that higher court. Then, it can be appealed again if approved, and all the way (eventually) to the Supreme Court. \nThe Supreme Court's rulings are final- there is no higher court.\n\nHowever, the Supreme court can change certain policies in later cases, changing previous sentences, etc.\n\nSo every other court has the usual rights and powers, just not the ability to make rulings final.
756351
If the acts were unconstitutional they would be overturned by the Supreme Court.  The Court has already ruled that certain rights of prisoners of war must be considered.
872301
yes but i doubt that will change the outcome\nany one can contest a will if they have the time and the money
486421
Congress can override veto power by passing a law with 2/3 majority or by a Constitutional amendment.
722055
Well the "Supereme Court of the United States" can declare any law of the legislature (i.e. Congress) and executive (i.e. The President) null and void, if it is against the constitution. This power of the Supereme Court is called "Judicial Review". A famous case in this connection is the case of "Marbury vs Madision".
445328
Its possible, but is extremely unlikely. There would have to be extenuating circumstances, and most judges would be unwilling to budge.
261742
All the time.  There was the whole line of commerce clause cases and "the switch in time that saved nine."  \n\nThe Court doesn't like to seem mercurial or indecisive.  Frequently, when it wants to change its stance on an issue, it does so in terms that make it seem like it's "clarifying" its opinion or modifying it or applying it to new facts.  Frequently, they just start chipping away little by little until, after a number of years, nothing is left of the old decision even though there was no one decision that reversed it.
763369
Nothing is inevitable. You never know which side a Justice will come down on. I would like to believe they weigh the arguments and then place them in a context of what is allowed by the Constitution. Activist judges ruling by judicial fiat from the bench are not good for anyone, no matter which side of the political spectrum they fall on.
1176385
OK, separation of powers is different from the checks and balances.\n\nThe separation of powers makes it clear that only the courts can interpret the constitution and whether it allows for or a law or executive order or not.  It makes it clear that only the president can issue executive orders (ie going to war etc.) and finally that only the legislature shall pass laws. ( I know the last two seem to cross over with the presidential veto and the fact that some laws are proposed by the white house... but it the separation is there.)\n\nThe checks and balances is that no one branch has supreme power and that each can and will be "checked" by the others.  The courts can overturn a law or executive order.  The president can veto a law and appoints the bench. And the legislature can overturn a veto and can amend the constitution to change the issue before the bench.\n\nI don't think either superseded either, they are both intertwined.  I do not think though that anyone should be monitoring the branches (except for the public).  If judges were to watch the pres, then the pres would have the right to watch judges and congress and congress would have the right to watch the judges etc.)\nWhat we need to do is hold our representative officials responsible for their actions and make sure that the best candidates are put forth on ballots.
349617
False. They can override a veto, but it takes a 2/3 majority vote.