Since it is the Supreme Court that decides what is constitutional and what is not, the decisions of the Supreme Court cannot be unconstitutional, however, it is always possible for the Supreme Court to make new decisions which reverse older decisions. So in theory, if the Supreme Court does something wrong, they will be reversed by a later sitting of the same court (but with new judges).
All US Courts, both federal and state, are required to uphold decisions (called binding precedents) of the US Supreme Court under the doctrine of judicial precedent or stare decisis (Latin: let the decision stand) if a question of law has already been settled (res judicata). US Supreme Court decisions are supposed to carry the rule of law, but lower courts sometimes interpret or decide cases in ways that contradict established precedent.Each case is unique, so each court that hears a particular matter may have a different interpretation as to which precedents are controlling and why. If the case is appealed to the US Supreme Court, and the Court grants cert (agrees to review the case under its appellate jurisdiction) and the Supreme Court agrees with the lower court ruling, a new precedent may be set. Otherwise, the Supreme Court may reverse the decision to bring it into compliance with established precedent.The reasoning behind the doctrine of stare decisis is ensuring a fair and consistent application of law to protect Constitutional rights.
A U. S. president cannot reverse a U. S. Supreme Court decision or the decision of the Supreme Court of any state or territory.
The Justices of the U.S. Court can reverse the decision of a lower court.
Supreme Court decisions can only be overturned in two ways:The US Supreme Court can overturn a decision on an earlier case by making a contradictory decision on a current case (or by reversing a current decision).Congress and the States can overturn a decision by amending the US Constitution.
No. Rulings of the US Supreme Court are 'the law of the land.'
Yes. That is usually what they do.
disappointed, because the judges did not reverse all liberal decisions
Since it is the Supreme Court that decides what is constitutional and what is not, the decisions of the Supreme Court cannot be unconstitutional, however, it is always possible for the Supreme Court to make new decisions which reverse older decisions. So in theory, if the Supreme Court does something wrong, they will be reversed by a later sitting of the same court (but with new judges).
Absolutely, yes. The US Supreme Court has overturned many lower court decisions on the basis of unconstitutionality of the law, as written or applied, or something that occurred in the legal process.
The Supreme Court (or any other court) is very unlikely to reverse prior case law decisions. However to directly answer your question, decisions by court of any kind are "final" and require no ratification by anyone. Court decisions may be challenged by new legislation or Constitutional Amendments that try to modify the laws that the court's decisions originally addressed. The court might then have to decide on the new laws and/or amendments, but this would be a new court decision.
U.S. courts of appealThe actual answer to your question is none. No-one repeals decision of any courts. However, decisions of courts can be reversed. The Federal Courts of Appeals can reverse decisions of federal district courts. That's it.Added: And the US Supreme Court can over-rule the decision of ANY inferior court.
That's correct. Congress can't reverse a US Supreme Court ruling, but they can rewrite an overturned law or can initiate a new constitutional amendment (must be ratified by 75% of the states) to override the decision. They usually choose to rewrite the law, because it is extremely difficult to amend the Constitution. For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Yes.
All US Courts, both federal and state, are required to uphold decisions (called binding precedents) of the US Supreme Court under the doctrine of judicial precedent or stare decisis (Latin: let the decision stand) if a question of law has already been settled (res judicata). US Supreme Court decisions are supposed to carry the rule of law, but lower courts sometimes interpret or decide cases in ways that contradict established precedent.Each case is unique, so each court that hears a particular matter may have a different interpretation as to which precedents are controlling and why. If the case is appealed to the US Supreme Court, and the Court grants cert (agrees to review the case under its appellate jurisdiction) and the Supreme Court agrees with the lower court ruling, a new precedent may be set. Otherwise, the Supreme Court may reverse the decision to bring it into compliance with established precedent.The reasoning behind the doctrine of stare decisis is ensuring a fair and consistent application of law to protect Constitutional rights.
Car reverse parking systems.
A U. S. president cannot reverse a U. S. Supreme Court decision or the decision of the Supreme Court of any state or territory.