Throwback Thursday: more on “interpretation” of the Constitution
Last week, we discussed the SCOTUS 1903 Champion v Ames case, (https://wp.me/pecX6i-3Jl) which ruled that Commerce has expansive “police powers” to regulate commerce, including the authority to prohibit some forms of commerce. But, as we mentioned last week, the US Constitution does not mention such a “police power.” Even more peculiar is that the “police power” arose from judicial interpretation of the Constitution, yet the word “interpret” is NOWHERE in the Constitution, let alone granted as a power to the courts. It has been done for so long, we largely just accept that’s what our nation’s courts do. But that doesn’t mean they have the Constitutional authority to do it. The Constitution does NOT give ANY courts the authority to “interpret” the constitution. Indeed, the only power entrusted to the judicial branch is the “judicial power.” Black’s Law Dictionary even defines “judicial power” as “the authority vested in courts and judges to hear and decide CASES and to make binding judgments on THEM.” It is further defined as “a power conferred on a public officer involving the exercise of judgment and discretion in deciding questions of right in SPECIFIC CASES affecting personal and proprietary interests.” Simply put, the judicial power is the power to apply the law to the facts of a specific case to determine the outcome of THAT case. There is no authority of the courts to “interpret” our laws, let alone our Constitution.
