Usually, ones that state they are appointed for life.
No
Marbury v. Madison
The Supreme Court determines what contradicts the Constitution. So it supposedly isn't possible for them to rule against it. If people don't like the decision of the Supreme Court, they can pass laws and/or amend the Constitution to change it. Congress would be who would overrule it, particularly members who were there when they passed whatever law. The Court is not allowed to put words in the mouth of Congress.
Supreme court justices decide if laws are constitutional.
The president sets a policy for enforcing the law, but the Supreme Court can void the policy if it violates the Constitution. -Apex
Usually, ones that state they are appointed for life.
No
the supreme court has the power to interpret the laws no matter what
The Supreme Court can check the power of Congress by ruling legislation passed by Congress is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court can do this when they a presented with an opportunity to hear a case which disputes a law. The supreme court's decision is final because it is the highest court in America.
Marbury v. Madison
The Supreme Court determines what contradicts the Constitution. So it supposedly isn't possible for them to rule against it. If people don't like the decision of the Supreme Court, they can pass laws and/or amend the Constitution to change it. Congress would be who would overrule it, particularly members who were there when they passed whatever law. The Court is not allowed to put words in the mouth of Congress.
Supreme Court
(Supreme Court)
Supreme court justices decide if laws are constitutional.
Any court can declare a law unconstitutional, but the government would appeal the decision to the US Supreme Court, the ultimate arbiter of constitutionality. Due to the appeals process, only the Supreme Court nullifies federal (and sometimes state) laws.
The president sets a policy for enforcing the law, but the Supreme Court can void the policy if it violates the Constitution. -Apex
Jackson ignored Worcester v. Georgia. This was significant because Andrew Jackson ignored the Supreme Court's decision which said that Georgia couldn't make laws that broke the terms on the authority of which the Cherokee's have the right to govern themselves on. Many people ask can he ignore the Supreme Court? Or, Why didn't the Supreme Court do anything about it? And do you know what I would say. idk. :)