Some scholars have praised Canada, Britain, and Israel for having a form of judicial review where a legislative majority in a clear statute can override an erroneous high court ruling or suspend it from taking effect. The argument is that judicial review is inherently counter-majoritarian and undemocratic, so legislative majorities should be able to overrule erroneous Supreme Court decisions. Should Congress be able to override U.S. Supreme Court decisions the way it can override a presidential veto? What majority ought to be required for such an override? Ought state voters in initiatives and referenda be able, by majority vote, to amend state constitutions so as to override state supreme courts? Audio and video recorded on November 22, 2008.
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 22
9:00 a.m. - 10:30 p.m.
Showcase Panel III: Second Look Doctrines: Should Congress be Empowered to Override the Court? Should Voters in State Initiatives and Referenda be Able to Override State Supreme Courts?
- Hon. Frank H. Easterbrook, United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
- Prof. Richard A. Epstein, University of Chicago Law School
- Prof. Neal K. Katyal, Georgetown University Law Center
- Moderator: Hon. Larry D. Thompson, Pepsico, Inc., and Former Deputy United States Attorney General