Tham Hartmann is an idiot.
You can't on one hand say the USSC is the final appelate court and then in the other turn say that the USSC can't rule a law as being un-Constitutional. That would automatically mean that any law passed by Congress and signed by the President would have to be immediately accepted by the USSC as being Constitutional since they don't have the power to make any type of judgement that could overturn a law. IOW, the only way a law can be overturned is by Congress going back and overturning their own law. That's ridiculous.
The USSC is suppose to take whatever case comes before it, make the appropriate Constitutional application, and render a verdict. When you have a law in front of the USSC of which a majority of the Justices cannot find justification in the Constitution by which to make a ruling, then they have no choice but the point out the case itself is without Constitutional basis. Hartmann wants them to just say "Well, this law is automatically Constitutional because Congress passed it and the President signed it." That's chaotic.
.
