A Problem with the Supreme Court

[babylonsister]

https://politicalwire.com/2024/05/23/a-problem-with-the-supreme-court/

A Problem with the Supreme Court
May 23, 2024 at 10:55 am EDT By Taegan Goddard

Dahlia Lithwick: “Rather than hurling ourselves headlong into the ‘Alito Must Recuse’ brick wall of ‘yeah, no,’ we need to dedicate the upcoming election cycle, and the attendant election news cycle, to a discussion of what it means to have a Supreme Court that is functionally immune from political pressure, from internal norms of behavior, from judicial ethics and disclosure constraints, and from congressional oversight and why that is deeply dangerous.”

Joyce Vance: “Perhaps we will learn some feud with local aquatic life led Mrs. Alito to fly the flag. But sarcasm aside, when you’re a Supreme Court Justice, you’re supposed to avoid giving off even a whiff of partisan bias. Or religious favoritism. As a judge, and certainly, as a Supreme Court Justice, you have that duty. Justice Alito flunks the test and flunks it badly.”

[jimfields33]

1. Maybe only have nonpartisan judges.

The states do this. At least some do. Does that fix the problem? It would be interesting to see how the votes were if there were no party attached. We shouldn’t guess the vote everytime. I know 80 percent of the votes are 9-0. But the crucial votes should be a mystery until decision. It never is because it’s easy to predict. Has been that way for decades.

[babylonsister]

4. Judges have been known to lie, especially the current

crew of SCJ's. How many claimed Roe v. Wade was the law of the land and then voted against it?

[jimfields33]

6. Law of the land doesn't mean anything.

Congress should have passed a law anytime in the last 50 years and we’d not be in this mess.

[babylonsister]

7. My point is

I think it would be difficult to find non-partisan judges.

[jimfields33]

8. Unfortunately, you are probably right.

I think it’s a shame. Judges should not have any political anything attached to them.

[Demsrule86]

2. How would that help us?

Other issues while not more important than the courts will work better in a presidential campaign. We need to sweep and win with substantial numbers to have a chance to deal with the courts in Congress..

[Johnny2X2X]

3. The Founders couldn't envision this level of corruption

Our system of government was set up to work if there was at least an honest effort to maintain its decorum.

In short there was an assumption of honor. They didn't predict a Trump who would find every loophole in our founding documents to exploiut for his own benefit. They couldn't predict jerrymandering. They couldn't predict corrupt SCOTUS justices literally taking bribes. They could predict one party no longer being committed to democracy and rule by the people.

[ITAL]

9. They could have predicted gerrymandering

Last edited Thu May 23, 2024, 04:12 PM - Edit history (1)

It was a practice that even predated the founding during the colonial assembly era.

Everything else they'd probably be surprised by. Perhaps not in that it would happen (they theorized all sorts of calamitous figures coming to power), but that there wouldn't be enough politicians of goodwill to put a stop to it.

[DENVERPOPS]

13. Actually

some Frenchman at the time our Democracy was being formed said the following:

"Democracy will work until some group or person figures out that they can vote themselves money"......

And here we are........................

[OMGWTF]

14. The love of money is the root of all evil.

[DENVERPOPS]

15. Agreed!

Some say: "MONEY is the root of all evil"......It isn't the money, IT IS GREED for that money that is the root to all evil.........

[littlemissmartypants]

19. Yes they could.

Corruption in government didn't just start manifesting in the twenty-first century.

Also, some would consider it insulting to infer the founders couldn't be aware or smart enough to spot those with less than honorable intentions.

That notion is exactly the reason for starting a country and kicking King George and his proxies like the Lord Proprietors and wealthy land owners to the curb from the start.

The earliest organized governments were authoritarian leaning, conceived by the wealthy and shaped by religious beliefs. Sound familiar?

Also:
This...

They could predict one party no longer being committed to democracy and rule by the people.

Refutes your premise anyway.

Democracy is messy and so is history but it's nuanced and available for anyone to actually study.

https://www.britannica.com/place/United-States/History

❤️pants

[Hotler]

5. You can tell the quality of Alito's work. He can't even plumb a flag pole.

edit to add; Maybe the wife put the pole up.

[WarGamer]

10. This election will be decided by eggs, butter, the rent, interest rates and cost of the orthodontist

[et tu]

11. but mostly by

women- roevember and vote blue~

[WarGamer]

12. God help us... but read this today on DU... a new poll

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218971379

It also states that, even among women, they care more about the economy and immigration than they do about abortion and women's rights. Even among Democrats. Most stating that anything trump could do wont be that big a deal, even if they lose some rights because the economy.

[DENVERPOPS]

16. As I have said before:

The Perfect Title of a book on the last 45+ years would be: WHILE THE NATION SLEPT

And a sequel to that book would be titled: BEND OVER AMERICA

[et tu]

18. one can believe the skewed polls

or in the power of women voters- we shall see.

[Mr.Bill]

21. Don't be silly.

No books will be allowed.

[Mr.Bill]

20. And if they control both houses of Congress,

even by one vote, the filibuster will be gone on January 21st. And people will say "Why didn't we do that?"

[StarryNite]

17. Alito is a big fail.

And he's not the only one.