What's So Special about Judges?

Article III of the Constitution says that the "judicial Power of the United States" belongs to the Supreme Court and such "inferior" courts as Congress chooses to establish.It tells us that judges may resolve "Cases" and "Controversies" and that Congress may make "Exceptions" to and "Regulations" of the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction.And it says that federal judges hold office during "good Behavior."That is a spare mandate.The Constitution does not identify the scope of the "judicial Power" or spell out what "Behavior" is "good."Article III does not mention the power that has come to be synonymous with the judiciary in popular, political, and academic minds: to set aside statutes and regulations that do not comport with the Constitution and to direct other political actors to implement the judges' constitutional vision.Such a power of review was not granted; it was inferred.It was not inferred because of any attribute unique to judges.Under the Supremacy Clause, the Constitution binds the states; the President takes a special oath to uphold the Constitution; every political actor owes an obligation to put the Constitution (the "supreme Law of the Land") first, a statute'or regulation second, and his private conception of The Good third., Nothing in the text of the Constitution marks a special role forjudges; each public official applies the Constitution when it is time to act' "Expertise," a leading contemporary justification for the judicial role, did not support judicial review in 1803.By and large the drafters of the Constitution sat in Congress, not on the Court.Not until after the Civil War did the Court start undoing (on Constitutional grounds) the work of Congress.Such experience as judges have acquired is a consequence of their jobs, not a cause.Anyway, professors of law