Chief Justice Marshall, Constitution, Intent

I am a "contrary person" whose first impulse to any proposition in which I find the slightest weak parts. At age 80-years I am also a (Self-declared) "Avocational Historian" with a special interest in the formation of our Republic and its institutions (eg SCOTUS).

The Founders were the product of the British system in which: Parliament was the final authority in all legal matters; But, which body turned over a limited judicial review to the "Law Lords" in its upper House.

I suggest that lacking "Lords" The Founders invented SCOTUS to hear such appeals of lower court decisions but NOT legislative decisions. I doubt me that they intended the courts to be a "co-equal" branch of our, then, new government.

Chief Justice Marshall mutated our Constitution, The Law and the intent of The Founders by making the courts "More equal" than that other branches as Federal judges/justices are not subject to the censure or approval of The People as expressed by their democratic voting as encourages or constrains our President and the Members of The Congress.

Over the years many Federal (And even State) jurists have used that power to overturn or vacated the acts of our democratically-elected public officials. This has been aggravated by, for example, US District Court judges doing so as applies to the entire United States

In many cases they have also ignored or pointedly rejected the intent of the authors of our 1789 Constitution, all of its amendments and laws as enacted by The Congress. Some of those offences were based on the concept of "Changing social conditions" as does not appear in our Constitution.

In the worst cases, Justice and, even, lower court judges, have tyrannically amended the Constitution by avoiding the democracy-based amendment process as requires the approval of the elected Members of the Congress and a quorum of elected Legislatures.