Britannica Sources used in this answer

Why can Congress review procedural rules made by the U.S. Supreme Court?

Created from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.

Mosaic portrait of Emperor Justinian I with a jeweled crown and halo, from the 6th-century Basilica of San Vitale in Ravenna, Italy. — Procedural law Justinian I, detail of a 6th-century mosaic at the Church of San Vitale, Ravenna, Italy.

In the United States, Congress has delegated the authority to formulate rules of civil, criminal, and appellate procedure to the Supreme Court because these matters require technical, expert knowledge that judges and lawyers possess. Legislative bodies often find themselves unable or unwilling to devote the necessary time to the day-to-day management of litigation.1

While Congress has delegated this power, it explicitly reserves the right to review and veto the procedural rules promulgated by the Court. This reservation of power serves as a legislative check, ensuring that Congress maintains ultimate oversight over the judicial machinery, even though it has historically felt little need to exercise its veto power. This arrangement reflects a balance where the judiciary manages the technical details of due process, while the legislature retains the authority to intervene if the rules fail to meet the needs of litigants or align with broader policy interests.1