Can we actually force the Supreme Court to assume our judicial power? I have no doubt that the present Court would assume it, but if a Court were to decline to our judicial power, what exactly would happen?
I believe that the federal Constitution does require the Supreme Court to resolve election-related disputes in the absence of a regional judiciary. Thus, when it comes to cases related to office-holding, there is no difficulty.
In other cases: If the regional government has taken an action in violation of the regional Constitution, then it has deprived someone of liberty without due process of law. Such a deprivation is forbidden by
federal law (specifically, the due process clause in the federal Bill of Rights). Thus, whenever the regional government violates the regional Constitution, it also violates the federal Constitution.
(I would note that there is real-life precedent for this approach. In
Bouie v. City of Columbia, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a state government had acted in violation of
state law, thereby violating the federal due process clause. The reason for which this does not happen very often is that the Supreme Court is supposed to defer to state courts' legal interpretations.)
Thus, even if the Supreme Court did not accept the judicial power of the Mideast, the federal judicial power would still entitle it to hear the case.
If we, therefore must retain some judiciary power in the Mideast may I suggest it be transferred to the Lt. Governor.
I think that the most important problem here is that the Lt. Governor may be called upon to rule in an election dispute involving himself. Also, I think that it might not be a good idea to leave legal interpretation in the hands of an executive officer.
