Steven Mazie
- 2.8K Followers
- 105 Following
- 674 Posts
Teacher. Journalist. Dad. Runner. I cover the Supreme Court for The Economist & teach political science in NYC. Books: American Justice 2015: the Dramatic Tenth Term of the Roberts Court; Israel's Higher Law: Religion and Liberal Democracy in the Jewish State.
#SCOTUS #running #nyc #politicalscience #law #politics #courts #teaching #pizza
"Whatever its flaws, the legal reform is another step on Israel's path toward accord with more traditional notions of balanced government," says Netanyahu. "In the well-known US Supreme Court precedent Marbury v. Madison, Justice John Marshall explained that 'it is the duty &
🐦🔗: https://twitter.com/NTarnopolsky/status/1619991778861658113
Noga Tarnopolsky נגה טרנופולסקי نوغا ترنوبولسكي on Twitter
“"Whatever its flaws, the legal reform is another step on Israel's path toward accord with more traditional notions of balanced government," says Netanyahu. "In the well-known US Supreme Court precedent Marbury v. Madison, Justice John Marshall explained that 'it is the duty &”
The legal reform will consolidate all power in the governing coalition. There will be no checks and no balance.
Pure gaslighting doublespeak from Netanyahu. Marshall wrote that the courts must strike down laws that conflict with the Constitution. And to give the Knesset veto power over the judiciary is to eliminate, not cultivate, “balance”.
Per @[email protected], SCOTUS paid Michael Chertoff’s firm ~$1m for what amounted to a “this investigation was awesome” endorsement of the Marshal’s investigation into the Dobbs leaker https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/27/politics/supreme-court-chertoff-leak-investigation/index.html
It was literally created in a case about the illegal arrests of civil rights protesters. https://twitter.com/5thcircappeals/status/1619160238514667520
🐦🔗: https://twitter.com/radleybalko/status/1619166306535870467
Plus ca change: a thoughtful colleague gifted me this 1937 polemic against FDR’s court-packing plan. A title for the ages. Thank you @[email protected]
@andthisismrspeacock I think that’s exactly what I’m saying
Another example: the Iowa Supreme Court recognized a right to abortion in its constitution in 2018…and last year reversed that decision following a personnel change. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/iowa-supreme-court-concludes-abortion-is-not-protected-by-the-state-constitution
Iowa Supreme Court concludes abortion is not protected by the state constitution
The Iowa Supreme Court has made it easier for lawmakers to limit or outlaw abortion in the state, reversing a decision by the court just four years ago that guaranteed the right to abortion under the Iowa Constitution.
It’s all about power. Not sure why the North Carolina Court would hesitate to say extreme partisan gerrymandering is just fine.