Is the Supreme Court still legitimate?

[Cyrano]

That's a bullshit question.Democrats are the only ones who think in terms of Supreme Court "legitimacy." Republicans think in terms of power. They've spent decades trying to seize absolute power in America. And then keeping it. They now own the Supreme Court. And, if they have their way over the next two years, they intend to win or steal the House, the Senate and the presidency.

And anyone who thinks that this Supreme Court isn't about to go after voting rights, civil rights, and human rights next, hasn't been paying attention.

We Dems have been playing against a stacked deck for decades. Much of our leadership knows that, yet has insisted in playing by the rules. When one side is playing by some set of "rules," and the other side isn't, then, in reality, there are no "rules." Time to fight back in every way possible, or lose all of our freedoms.

[Lovie777]

1. NO . ...

[wnylib]

2. SC has not been legitimate since 12/12/00, Bush v Gore.

[lapfog_1]

5. THIS!

[Cyrano]

6. Yep. They took it on themselves to appoint a president.

Every Republican SC Justice who voted for that should have been impeached and removed. But of course, we didn't have the power to do it. And now, we have even less power to fight against a court that doesn't give a rat's ass about the constitution.

[hlthe2b]

3. No Public perception of legitimacy matters greatly. It is the only reason that states & other courts

do not act in opposition to SCOTUS opinions, but instead, defer to them. Given the increasing move from centuries of high court norms and the overt politicization towards religious or other ideology, not to mention the refusal to recuse on cases that are self-beneficial, the court SHOULD be totally revamped and brought under Federal court ethics requirements/penalties. If it does not, the RW may well find their hold on the court to be a double-edged sword--held against them. I think we've reached critical mass, even if it takes a few more years...

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. All those experiments have a bad ending.

[The Magistrate]

4. No, Sir, it Is Not

It has been tottering since 2000, and went utterly over the edge with the ascension of Barret.

Worth noting, since we are apparently very concerned with the precise language of the Constitution, the the founding document nowhere grants authority to the Supreme Court to review the whether a law is Constitutional or otherwise. It's appellate review is a creature of Congress, not the Constitution.

Marbury v. Madison was a judical power-grab by a wholly political court of Federalists seeking to hamstring the Jefferson administration.

[Amishman]

7. Legitimate as in having the legal authority to do what they are doing? Yes.

They however are not respectable or reputable.

If I hate my boss and they're terrible at their job, and are a horrible person to boot - they are still my boss. SCOTUS is the same way. They are still the highest court in the country and by our government system they have the authority.

The huge deal inflicted credibility problem of the court does not take away their legitimacy or authority

What I'm trying to say is 'legitimacy' probably isn't the right word for the court's self inflicted crisis

[sinkingfeeling]

8. Hasn't been since 2001.

[RKP5637]

9. Nothing more than another bunch of politicians with extreme clout. SCOTUS is now a bullshit group

that functions as an extreme political party with lots of power and clout controlled by the GOP. Looking back in history, one day, SCOTUS will be seen as instrumental in the downfall of the American democracy, if this continues. The democrats need to fight fire with fire. It's time for the democrats to STOP being nice guys and following all the rules while the GOP breaks them all. Frankly, it's all out political warfare.

[RAB910]

10. "Still"? It hasn't been legit for years. The monster Moscow Mitch

with help from Trump and Bush saw to that

[dem4decades]

11. Yes, Legitimate assholes. Consider the clowns that are on there now, 5 are dopes. Roberts isn't

a dope but he's an asshole with smarts.

[uponit7771]

12. NO ... RvW decision and leak, Thomas conflict of interest, Bush v Gore, Justices lying under oath

... about precedence, overuse shadow dockets on big decisions.

Just ... to many in a short time

[Ocelot II]

13. What is meant by "legitimate"?

The pertinent dictionary definition is "accordant with law or with established legal forms and requirements." So in that sense, the court is legitimate. It exists and operates in accordance with the Constitution and federal statutes. What it has become, however, is a legally established and therefore "legitimate" body that has lost the confidence of a large sector of the population. It exists in the first place as a branch of government intended to provide an ostensibly neutral arbiter of the law and thus a check against the political tendencies of the other two branches. Some of its decisions since its creation have been politically-motivated and some have been downright bad, but overall it has at least seemed neutral and fair enough that the other branches and the people have been willing to accept its decisions as reasonable applications of the law that they were willing to accept even if they didn't agree.

It started to slide, I think, with Bush v. Gore, which was such a bad, dumb, poorly-reasoned and disingenuous opinion that its goal - to achieve a particular political outcome by twisting the law and the facts of the case - was screamingly obvious. It's gone to hell in the proverbial handbasket during TFG's maladministration with the addition of overtly biased and arguably unqualified justices, and now the draft opinion in Dobbs shows beyond doubt that the court is just another political body, and as such will have lost the confidence of a whole lot of us that our cases can have a chance at a fair hearing. That's the whole reason for a court to exist - to give all cases before them a fair hearing - and if a court can't be trusted to ensure impartial justice, its technical "legitimacy" is meaningless.

[newdayneeded]

14. yes, it's legitimate

Who's gonna tell them it's not. Lifetime appointments, untouchable. This right now, is probably stuff the founders had nightmares about. This SC majority can reverse all things non biblical and bring us back 80 years. They'll have a majority for at least 10 to 15 years based on their ages.

[G_j]

15. not