In Federalist 22, Alexander Hamilton savaged the idea of a supermajority Congress, writing that “its real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of government and to substitute the pleasure, caprice or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent or corrupt junta, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority.”
In Federal 58, James Madison wasn’t much kinder to the concept. “In all cases where justice or the general good might require new laws to be passed, or active measures to be pursued, the fundamental principle of free government would be reversed. It would be no longer the majority that would rule; the power would be transferred to the minority.”
They were clearly opposed to the filibuster, but they also allowed the Senate and the House to set their own rules, so I don't think that the SC can overturn it. My guess is that, whoever gets a majority in the Senate next year, the current filibuster rule will be changed. In which case the SC would then say, that is the remedy for it, the judiciary can't dictate to the Senate what their rules ought to be.
But it is an interesting idea. |
