[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 472 Introduced in House (IH)]








109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 472

    Recognizing the independence of the courts of the United States.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 13, 2006

    Mr. Stark (for himself and Mr. Conyers) submitted the following 
   concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION


 
    Recognizing the independence of the courts of the United States.

Whereas the Constitution of the United States established three branches of 
        Government, exhibiting a separation of powers, as well as a series of 
        checks and balances among branches;
Whereas the power of the Supreme Court to review Acts of Congress was 
        established in 1803 by Marbury v. Madison and cemented by consensus 
        among Americans;
Whereas laws enacted by Congress and actions taken by the Executive Branch can 
        conflict with the core principles of the Constitution;
Whereas vibrant democracy requires open discourse and constant self-reflection, 
        as well as the malleability of those truths not considered essential to 
        the preservation of the Federal system itself;
Whereas various bills to limit the jurisdiction of Federal courts to review the 
        constitutionality of Acts of Congress or controversial social issues, 
        commonly referred to as ``court-stripping'', have recently passed the 
        House of Representatives;
Whereas many other such bills have been proposed or introduced for consideration 
        by Congress;
Whereas the power of Congress to limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts to 
        adjudicate basic constitutional issues or to prevent the courts from 
        hearing constitutional challenges is highly questionable;
Whereas this power would weaken the Constitution by rendering potentially 
        unconstitutional laws immune from any challenge in the Federal courts; 
        and
Whereas this power, in the hands of our predecessors, could have precluded 
        favorable court decisions such as Brown v. Board of Education: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),  
That it is the sense of Congress that--
            (1) the Congress hereby commits itself to exercise 
        additional restraint regarding the passage of bills that limit 
        the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States; and
            (2) these courts should continue to adjudicate cases 
        alleging conflicts between Acts of Congress and the 
        Constitution of the United States.
                                 <all>