Evening star., 1946-06-22
Letters to The Star
Differs With Mr.. Mellett On
Supreme Courts Veto Power

To the Editor Of The Star:
In Lowell Mellett's article in The Star
of June Is he makes some statements
which seem to me very misleading. He
speaks of the power of Congress to
regulate" the Supreme Court and
quotes that part of the United States
Constitution which defines the jurisdic-
ton of that court, original and appel
late, the latter being under such regu-
lations as the Congress shall make"
The Congress in the past has established
circuit courts of appeal to relieve the
Supreme Court of overburdensome ap-
pellate jurisdiction; but cannot find
any other power vested in the Congress
to regulate the Supreme Court, nor
does Mr.. Mellett cite any.
He further writes: 1.-THE court regu-
lates the Congress through its veto
power over legislation. 1t works like
this-Congress enacts law, presumably
in response to the public need or de-
mand-the Supreme Court says sorry,
it's not constitutional Congress meek
ly submits and the new law ceases to
be law" But take issue with Mr..
Mellett in this statement. The Supreme
has attempted to exercise such power.
The veto power is exercised only by the
President who can use it with respect
to any act of Congress whatever,
whether or not passed by large major
tiles in both houses, presumably in re-
sponse to public need or demand" and
whether or not 1t is constitutional.
Mr.. Mellett apparently has overlooked
Section of Article VI of the Constitu-
ton, which reads: This Constitution,
and the laws of the United States
which shall be made in pursuance there
of; and all treaties made, or which shall
be made, under the authority of the
United States, shall be the supreme law
of the land and the judges in every
State shall be bound thereby, anything
in the constitution or laws of any
State to the contrary Notwithstanding.
Whether law enacted by Congress is
law made in pursuance" of the Con-
stitution, and is thereby a part of the
supreme law of the land, must be de-
cided somewhere, and as that question
is a judicial question, the courts in
which the Constitution vests the judi
cial power of the United States are the
proper and only tribunals to decide it.
I suggest that Mr.. Mellett read the
cease of Marbury VS.. Madison and the
opinion of Chief Justice Marshall there
in.
No veto power is exercised if the Su-
preme Court decides that an act of Con-
gress is not a law made in pursuance of
the Constitution, but quite the contrary.
From Mr.. Mellett's' statement above
quoted one would suppose that when an
act of Congress is passed the Supreme
Court simply says it is not constitution
al, and that's all there is to it. He seems
to be ignorant of the fact that the ques-
tion whether an act of Congress is or Is
not repugnant to the Constitution can
come before the court for decision only
when there is case in which the rights
Of the parties are to be determined; that
is whether right asserted under the act
conflicts with the right of the opposing
party asserted under the Constitution.
I deplore Mr.. Mellett's f1ippancy in
claiming that the Supreme Court just
grabbed power to veto acts of Con-
gress, and I trust the foregoing sheds a
different light on the subject.
CHARLES L. FRAILEY.