[vintermann]

The role of the court is whatever the hell it pleases. It is the court which gets the final word on what they should be.

They do write opinions, but they might as well not since they answer to no one. No one can hold them accountable for blatantly contradicting themselves.

They can very theoretically be impeached, but that's a 100% political process - it's equally (im)possible whether they're "fulfilling their role" or not.

It's not a very smart system. I'm hoping Americans start questioning some of those patriotic pieties they're taught in their civics classes as a result of the mask-dropping that's happened lately.

[nescioquid]

> The role of the court is whatever the hell it pleases.

Sort of seems like it. It was only in the early 19th century that the Supreme Court gave itself a) the power of legislative review, and b) declared itself the supreme interpreter of the constitution.

Since we've been busy upending precedent, why not upend these two precedents as well?

> They can very theoretically be impeached

In the past, one SC justice resigned under the threat of impeachment over his financial conflict of interest. At least one of our justices has been in violation of ethics rules around financial (and political) conflicts of interest. Several other have lied under oath at their confirmation hearings. I'd at least like to see Congress open some investigations as the first step towards impeachment.

But you're right, it is a political process, and I think the democrats are more than happy to simply fundraise off of this rather than exercising any check at all.

[bdowling]

> No one can hold them accountable for blatantly contradicting themselves.

The democratically elected Congress can pass new laws to overrule most SCOTUS decisions. A few decisions on constitutionality would require an amendment, but those are the exception.

[dawnerd]

They can be checked but that’s require an amendment which… yeah good luck. We can’t even get bipartisan bills through.