General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIt's time to say it: the US supreme court has become an illegitimate institution
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/25/us-supreme-court-illegitimate-institutionWith its decision on Roe v Wade, the court has signaled its illegitimacy and thrown the American project into question
On Friday, in Dobbs v Jackson Womens Health, the supreme court overruled its nearly 50-year precedent of Roe v Wade, the 1973 case that legalized abortion nationwide. It is difficult to overstate just how devastating this is for pregnant people, for women as a class and for anyone with even a passing interest in individual freedom and equality.
But its also devastating for those of us who care quite a bit about American democratic traditions and the strength of our institutions. Because, with this ruling, the supreme court has just signaled its illegitimacy and it throws much of the American project into question. Which means that Democrats and others who want to see America endure as a representative democracy need to act.
Of the nine justices sitting on the current court, five all of them in the majority opinion that overturned Roe were appointed by presidents who initially lost the popular vote; the three appointed by Donald Trump were confirmed by senators who represent a minority of Americans. A majority of this court, in other words, were not appointed by a process that is representative of the will of the American people.
Two were appointed via starkly undemocratic means, put in place by bad actors willing to change the rules to suit their needs. Neil Gorsuch only has his seat because Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, blocked the ability of Barack Obama to nominate Merrick Garland or anyone to a supreme court seat, claiming that, because it was an election year, voters should get to decide.
And then Donald Trump appointed Amy Coney Barrett in a radically rushed and incomplete, incoherent process in an election year.
LogicFirst
(571 posts)6 members of the Court overturned those 7. Since when can 6 beat 7?
Next well be told that winning the popular vote doesnt mean you win the election!
Oh, thats right - we already know that.
world wide wally
(21,740 posts)PERIOD!
colsohlibgal
(5,275 posts)We play by the rules, they play ruthlessly. Mitch personally enabled this.
We need to swarm the ballot boxes this fall. I am cautiously optimistic that this has lit a fire among Democrats and Independents. If we dont draw a line in the sand in 2022 and 2024 we might become this Centuriess Nazi Germany.
This is situation critical folks.
ForgedCrank
(1,779 posts)to know what the most sad part is to me?
"We" did this.
Allow me to elaborate.
The design is flawed; a "court" that consists of political appointees from which we expect fairness and justice. Those two things (politics and justice) do not mix well, and they never will either. I'm not going to make the outrageous claim to know how to do it better, but it was destined to become what it is by the very nature of it's design. Politics and justice cannot co-exist in this manner. One could argue against that point if they felt compelled, but look at what just happened this week. There isn't much of an argument.
Jade Fox
(10,030 posts)ForgedCrank
(1,779 posts)understand why that was built-in to the design. It was to minimize the roller coaster consequences of continually changing political winds. We have to ask which would be worse? 4-8 year terms? I can't imagine the chaos that would create.
The Senate would spend it's entire term fighting about justices.
Theres a lot to think about, that's why I can't come up with any valid way to fix it that doesn't' carry even worse ramifications.
Jade Fox
(10,030 posts)it might work.
Snarkoleptic
(5,997 posts)who funds Federalist, Judicial Crisis Network, and other outfits that are packing our courts with regressives.
We are way overdue for some transparency on who is steering us toward fascism.
JHB
(37,158 posts)It's been one of their projects since the 70s.
SamKnause
(13,091 posts)They are not Honorable.
9 people, who are not elected, should not have the power to dictate what laws 333 million people have to follow.