The US Supreme Court is the only court specifically mentioned in the Constitution; none of the other federal courts, past, present or future, was mentioned.
Courts have jurisdiction over interpretations of the constitution and can suggest amendments. The supreme court was the only one mentioned in the US constitution.
In theory, any court can decide this, but only the decisions of the US Supreme Court are binding in regards to the US constitution (for State constitutions, the state's Supreme Court is generally the final arbiter... the US Supreme Court might rule that a particular provision in a state's constitution is not compatible with the US constitution, but usually will let the state court decide for itself in strictly internal matters.)
No. Nowhere in the constitution is "freedom of rights" mentioned
Yes, in Article I, Section 3, the US Constitution establishes the United States Senate.
The [State] Supreme Court (or its equivalent) has final authority unless the question being addressed in the state constitution conflicts with the US Constitution, in which case the US Supreme Court has final authority.
Courts have jurisdiction over interpretations of the constitution and can suggest amendments. The supreme court was the only one mentioned in the US constitution.
The only court specifically provided for in the US Constitution is the Supreme Court. Article 3 establishes the Supreme Court ". . .and such inferioe courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." Further, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 9 authorizes Congress to constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court. The federal court system has several individual courts, but only the Supreme Court is mentioned in the Constitution
Congress has established a lot of courts in the federal judiciary; the Constitution gives them that power in Article I. The only court specifically mentioned in the Constitution is the US Supreme Court, which was mandated by Article III of the Constitution, but established by Congress in the Judiciary Act of 1789.
No
No, the US Supreme Court cannot violate the Constitution. The Court's role is to interpret and apply the Constitution, ensuring that laws and actions adhere to its provisions. While opinions on interpretations may vary, the Court's decisions are binding and can only be overturned or altered through subsequent legal proceedings or constitutional amendments.
In theory, any court can decide this, but only the decisions of the US Supreme Court are binding in regards to the US constitution (for State constitutions, the state's Supreme Court is generally the final arbiter... the US Supreme Court might rule that a particular provision in a state's constitution is not compatible with the US constitution, but usually will let the state court decide for itself in strictly internal matters.)
George Washington nominated James Wilson, signatory to both the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution, to the US Supreme Court in October 1789. Wilson served on the Court until his death in August 1798.
Any court can interpret the constitution, but the US Supreme Court is the final arbiter on constitutionality.
The US Supreme Court can nullify state laws that conflict with the federal constitution. While the Court has jurisdictional limitations, they are not accurately described by the question.
No. Nowhere in the constitution is "freedom of rights" mentioned
Yes, in Article I, Section 3, the US Constitution establishes the United States Senate.
The [State] Supreme Court (or its equivalent) has final authority unless the question being addressed in the state constitution conflicts with the US Constitution, in which case the US Supreme Court has final authority.