Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: SCOOP: New whistleblower docs show Jane Roberts, who is married to SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts [View all]Farmer-Rick
(12,625 posts)45. Of course the supreme court
Is going to interpret it to suit their needs. And by "courts" you mean the Supreme Court that benefited in it's power grab.
And I agree with you that Congress has no control over judicial matters that is definitely in the realm of the courts. But judicial review is a made up power that gives legislative and executive power to the courts.
I can read for myself and the constitution clearly gives Congress control over the Supreme Court except in judicial matters.
But I'll grant you that since Congress is broken, the end result, despite the made up power of judicial review, would have ended up in the same place.
It's reminds me of how preachers interpret the bible. They pick and choose the parts they like.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
50 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
SCOOP: New whistleblower docs show Jane Roberts, who is married to SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts [View all]
BeckyDem
Apr 2023
OP
And all 9 Justices (yes even the liberals) said they don't support more oversight
Marius25
Apr 2023
#5
It should not be up to them, period. The liberals may be fearful of a conservative led review.
BeckyDem
Apr 2023
#7
Agree with statement. Coequal and independent branches of government is all the statement says.
Alexander Of Assyria
Apr 2023
#25
Congress only has limited authority to grant SCOTUS jurisdictional issues...criminal, civil,
Alexander Of Assyria
Apr 2023
#41
No. The clause has been interpreted by courts to be exactly what it is...jurisdictional.
Alexander Of Assyria
Apr 2023
#44
Courts are mandated to interpret laws, it's their very reason to exist.
Alexander Of Assyria
Apr 2023
#46
It's not oversight that's the issue, it's lack of an ethical code.
Alexander Of Assyria
Apr 2023
#22
Because of course. What's the good of a lifetime appointment that literally allows you to impose
Comfortably_Numb
Apr 2023
#9
They are smart enough enough to know that the cash teat will dry up if they start ruling against the
Comfortably_Numb
Apr 2023
#29