Congress is the House and the Senate, most Americans think they are one and the same when they hear or use the word Congress.
Article III section 1 Vesting clause
Section 1 Vesting Clause
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain an…
Congress is the House and the Senate, most Americans think they are one and the same when they hear or use the word Congress.
Article III section 1 Vesting clause
Section 1 Vesting Clause
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office
Section II Juticiability'
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State,—between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
Section 3. Jurisdiction"
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
which is an analysis and interpretation of the constitution I see lots of sub section interpreations which raises the question who interpreted and by what authority.
In fact there is nothing in the Constitution as regards appointments or approval of federal judges, nor their removal.
It is only by custom that the Senate, not the House, approves their appointment, and he who giveth can taketh away.
I included that link in my first reply, but it lacks the force of law. It is just someones analysis and interpretation and says so at the top.
There is nothing in the constitution or law that enumerates those interpretations, in other words they are some one's opinion, maybe DOJ, but it is an opinion only, not law. Same thing with Barr's bullshit rationale for not prosecuting the president.
Is our country ran by the opinion of the political appointee that sits as Attorney General? if so, then is Thomas Cromwell to Henry VIII
Congress is the House and the Senate, most Americans think they are one and the same when they hear or use the word Congress.
Article III section 1 Vesting clause
Section 1 Vesting Clause
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office
Section II Juticiability'
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State,—between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
Section 3. Jurisdiction"
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
When I go to Constitution annotated https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-3/#:~:text=Article%20III%20Judicial%20Branch&text=The%20judicial%20Power%20of%20the,to%20time%20ordain%20and%20establish.
which is an analysis and interpretation of the constitution I see lots of sub section interpreations which raises the question who interpreted and by what authority.
In fact there is nothing in the Constitution as regards appointments or approval of federal judges, nor their removal.
It is only by custom that the Senate, not the House, approves their appointment, and he who giveth can taketh away.
Article II, Section 2. https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C2-3-5/ALDE_00013096/
I included that link in my first reply, but it lacks the force of law. It is just someones analysis and interpretation and says so at the top.
There is nothing in the constitution or law that enumerates those interpretations, in other words they are some one's opinion, maybe DOJ, but it is an opinion only, not law. Same thing with Barr's bullshit rationale for not prosecuting the president.
Is our country ran by the opinion of the political appointee that sits as Attorney General? if so, then is Thomas Cromwell to Henry VIII
That IS the Constitution. Require Senate approval. That's the law.