|
|
|
|
|
|
by Alupis
1248 days ago
|
|
|
> Its credibility is very important to its continued power and to our avoiding constitutional crises This is the point of contention. It's a modern concept, when some folks of a particular political leaning didn't get their way. Suddenly, practically overnight, SCOTUS is a politically motivated organization that must keep up with popular opinions or risk "losing power". Otherwise, they're branded as evil-doers and worse... This is simply not how our government works (thankfully). If it did, people would have ignored Congress and the Office of the President long ago... and we would no longer have a functioning federal government, or a country for the matter. The idea that the Judicial Branch is beholden to popular opinion and must maintain "credibility" is something that happens to unstable governments in far away parts of the world. This is not how our system works, again... thankfully. Just because the judicial branch moves slowly and doesn't play petty politics does not mean they are not effective. Credibility has literally nothing to do with this system - it was designed that way on purpose. |
|
|
I've repeatedly pointed out that it's not, at all. It's been a feature of our political system from the beginning. The ideal is that it's not, but that's never actually been true. It's something that's been known as a feature of this particular arrangement of government since before the Constitution itself was written—when it was still in the planning phase.
> Credibility has literally nothing to do with this system
You keep using "literally" and it keeps making your points worse because they're literally wrong, while they might have merit as an aspiration, at least.
> Just because the judicial branch moves slowly and doesn't play petty politics does not mean they are not effective.
Like... they totally do play petty politics. Again, read any history of the court, it'll be pretty clear that they always have. It'd be kinda weird if they didn't, when you think about it. It's just a bunch of people, after all, as was (again) repeatedly pointed out by various founders.