The Definitive Case Against Judicial Supremacy | 2/11/25

Unless we terminate the erroneous notion of judicial supremacism, we will be left with tyranny, and Trump and red states will be powerless to change anything. In today’s extra-long episode, I offer the definitive history, legal case, and philosophical argument against judicial supremacism and in favor of constitutional decompartmentalization. I explain the system our founders adopted and rejected, the true lesson of Marbury v. Madison, and the difference between judicial review and judicial supremacism. There is no such thing as a judicial veto on a law and policy, and the other branches have an even greater obligation and power to push back against bad rulings that affect broad political questions. I explain how Trump can "walk before running" and slowly inch away from judicial supremacism in cases where judges try to mandate affirmative executive actions on issues that are clearly out of their jurisdiction.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices