@hichris123 I'm not sure its possible to have any such thing with Vector. I've already cited Jefferson himself talking about what he believes SCOTUS can't do: "If the legislature fails to pass laws for a census ... the judges cannot issue their mandamus to them; if the President fails to supply the place of a judge ... the judges cannot force him"

Vector however apparently wants to insist that Jefferson meant SCOTUS can't declaring an Act of Congress unconstitutional, without having a single Jefferson quote actually saying that. Given his fixated position and insistence on filling all of his comments with personal attacks, what kind of "constructive" discussion are you expecting?

For my part, @hichris123 , I think I've been quite restrained in the face of Vector's continued belittling and insults.

@hichris123 though if you or anyone else reasonable find a genuine issue with my answers, I'm more than happy to discuss it.

@Semaphore Okay, how about this: 1. If anyone is rude, flag it. Either flag for a moderator, or flag as offensive/spam (in chat). 2. If you & him cannot discuss this nicely, just ignore it. Do not continue. 3. Yes, he's been mean to you. But you've also had your share of rudeness. Please don't be mean to someone else even though they're being mean to you. Just flag it.

@hichris123 yes well, until today the only moderator action I've seen were to have my answer "temporarily" (what a joke) locked ostensibly because of comment discussion spam. Forgive me if I see little good in flagging.

@Semaphore I've flagged some rude comments, and I'm going to poke one of your moderators to see what's the deal with that answer. Also, 1 hour chatbans were handed out earlier.

@Semaphore I'm sorry you think I've taken sides in the comments section. Please believe me I have not. It is surprisingly difficult and time consuming to sift through all the comments that get flagged. I'll take a look at the thread again, because I'm sure I've missed something. Truly, I did not intend to make anyone think I took sides.

@Semaphore also, with respect to the question of judicial review, I think the way the question was originally worded was looking for an explanation of the legal opinion of Marbury v. Madison. At least that is how I read the question. If the OP reworded the question to make it more generally about the history surrounding the concept of judicial review then I don't think I would have voted to close.

Honestly, I think it's great that there has been an uptick in activity, and I appreciate both @Vector and @Semaphore contributions, but the site strives to be civil, so please be nice. Or ignore each other :)