Congress itself can over turn the 1973 Resolution.
Right. Never claimed that it couldn't. However, whatever congress does does not address the constitutionality of the measure.
The Supremes need not be bothered with matters of national security
Perhaps not. But who gets to decide just what national security entails? Should the "defenders" of national security be the ones to decide what issues fall into that category? If so, what happens to checks and balances? What happens to civil liberties and civil rights? To the whole Bill of Rights?
Do I trust the Supremes? Not much. Congress? Not at all. The president? Don't make me laugh. Of the three, the Supremes are the only ones that do not have a history of increasing their power at the expense of the population (just at the expense of Congress and the executive -- which is all to the good IMHO).
So, perhaps they aren't qualified to determine what should be done about national security, but they are the best qualified to say what does and does not fall under that umbrella. Or, at least, so I see it.
The thought of giving the president unlimited power for the sake of national security and then letting him determine just what national security covers scares the crap out of me. I can hardly think of a better path to tyranny.
