this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2023
515 points (98.0% liked)

News

23649 readers
2580 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 125 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Unelected, serve for life, say they are untouchable and can do as they please. How is that not a king?

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Any position that is for life is too long, especially an appointed one with almost zero mechanisms for removal.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Almost, impeachment is one big one allowed. I believe only one justice was impeached but I bet the issue is, you can't get republicans to agree as then democrats can put one in. Which is a terrible injustice so they'll make sure to vote down anything to make sure the supreme court stays right winged.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Except the one mechanism for removal. You don't need more than one.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

because they're not murdered by their successor?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

Not murdered by their successor so far

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Did you ever hear the tragedy of Ruth Ginsburg the Wise?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I still blame her for Barrett.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Because Supreme Court cant create their own laws directly, missing legislature power, having no direct power to control national finances/budgets, a main power of a country and they dont have control of the executives including army and police. All their power depends on laws made by legislature and constitution.

Thats how the three pillars of power works in all democracies. Just because your legislature or executives or even forefathers who made the constitution fucked up, doesnt mean the supreme court is an absolute monarchy. The biggest piece of shit mistake you made was having a two party system. In other countries, supreme courts arent as binary partisan. Coalitions of Partys vote way more reasonable judges to supreme courts

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago

Considering the Supreme Court's entire schtick is the arbitrary definition of a word's meaning by the sitting justices... I'd disagree.

They can literally change the definition of a law at a whim. It doesn't really matter at that point what the law even says unless it's lawyered up specifically to remove their powers. Even then, don't expect the conservative justices to go down without a fight lol.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

The problem is that they blatantly collude with the other two pillars. They can't make their own laws, but they can collude with the others to bring a case to their doorstep to make a ruling not based on precedent or good faith interpretation of the law.

They effectively can create whatever laws they want, just with extra steps.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

George Washington warned against bicameralism, but they ignored him. Our Supreme Court positions have always been non-partisan until recent history.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Thats how the three pillars of power works in all democracies.

And the amount of people willing to dismantle this particular one means it does serve its purpose well.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

The "unelected" part is on purpose, though I'd prefer sortition.

The biggest group of voters may decide who controls the government, but they shouldn't decide who takes places in the supreme court. At least not in the same mechanism.

Well, unless you can make it a 95% "in favor" vote, of course. Then, I guess, there'd be no hope anyway.