MicroWaveJustice Alito says Congress lacks the power to impose an ethics code on the Supreme Court
GrayThis is genuinely quite a scary belief coming from a SCOTUS justice. In effect he is saying that the SCOTUS is the only institution in the US that is completely untouchable by legislation. That elevates the SCOTUS to a level beyond any other government position. Effectively our benevolent overlords. Given how low of approval ratings that the SCOTUS has, their recent series of ideological activist decisions, and the fact that they aren’t even elected positions, I find myself increasingly in support of a fundamental redefinition of the SCOTUS as we know it. I don’t see why we shouldn’t stack the SCOTUS when they’ve fundamentally abandoned their duty to any level of fairness or responsibility for the citizens of the US.
baldingpudendaUnelected, serve for life, say they are untouchable and can do as they please. How is that not a king?
Because Supreme Court cant create their own laws directly, missing legislature power, having no direct power to control national finances/budgets, a main power of a country and they dont have control of the executives including army and police. All their power depends on laws made by legislature and constitution.
Thats how the three pillars of power works in all democracies. Just because your legislature or executives or even forefathers who made the constitution fucked up, doesnt mean the supreme court is an absolute monarchy. The biggest piece of shit mistake you made was having a two party system. In other countries, supreme courts arent as binary partisan. Coalitions of Partys vote way more reasonable judges to supreme courts
blanketswithsmallpoxConsidering the Supreme Court's entire schtick is the arbitrary definition of a word's meaning by the sitting justices... I'd disagree.
They can literally change the definition of a law at a whim. It doesn't really matter at that point what the law even says unless it's lawyered up specifically to remove their powers. Even then, don't expect the conservative justices to go down without a fight lol.
George Washington warned against bicameralism, but they ignored him. Our Supreme Court positions have always been non-partisan until recent history.
The problem is that they blatantly collude with the other two pillars. They can’t make their own laws, but they can collude with the others to bring a case to their doorstep to make a ruling not based on precedent or good faith interpretation of the law.
They effectively can create whatever laws they want, just with extra steps.
Thats how the three pillars of power works in all democracies.
And the amount of people willing to dismantle this particular one means it does serve its purpose well.
because they're not murdered by their successor?
Not murdered by their successor so far
stownDid you ever hear the tragedy of Ruth Ginsburg the Wise?
too soon
Still miss her :(
McNastyI still blame her for Barrett.
Any position that is for life is too long, especially an appointed one with almost zero mechanisms for removal.
outrageousmatterAlmost, impeachment is one big one allowed. I believe only one justice was impeached but I bet the issue is, you can’t get republicans to agree as then democrats can put them in.
elscallrExcept the one mechanism for removal. You don’t need more than one.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
The “unelected” part is on purpose, though I’d prefer sortition.
The biggest group of voters may decide who controls the government, but they shouldn’t decide who takes places in the supreme court. At least not in the same mechanism.
Well, unless you can make it a 95% “in favor” vote, of course. Then, I guess, there’d be no hope anyway.