What I fail to understand is why, when we are taught even as small children that the constitution is the supreme law of the land
(as it is interpreted by the US Supreme Court), and that any law that contradicts it is null and void
(only if the US Supreme Court decides that it is)
I doubt the founding fathers, upon writing the Bill of Rights, had it in their minds that the Bill was of no effect, unless and until it was "interpreted" by SCOTUS or any other high court
Actually, the whole notion of "judicial review" was successfully argued... based upon what was written in the Constitution, in Marbury v. Madison in 1803. Even before the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the power of judicial review had been exercised in a number of states. In between 1776 and the addition of the bill of rights in 1791, courts in at least seven of the thirteen states had taken part in judicial review and had invalidated some state laws because they violated the state's constitution. see: http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/constitution/article03/13.html
You're right, I do struggle with this concept. I think the discussion o the schools you correctly referenced, and in this thread are good examples as to why I feel the way I do, and retain some confusion on the subject.