The flip-flop is not as fast as the law makes it seem, because a law against X only gets passed when X seems like a real possibility. Nobody was passing gay marriage bans in 1850 -- only when it seemed imminent did people try to fight it.
This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind
111–118 of 118 posts
Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind
#112The case comes amid a wave of gay marriage legalization... This phrase, and the title, mask the fact that in the majority of states same-sex marriage legalization came from court cases, not through legislation or referenda[1]. "America", broadly construed, is quickly changing its mind, too, but this "wave" is more a product of judicial thought than public opinion. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in…
In America, there's no longer much legitimacy placed in legislation; we generally look to the judiciary for any actual governing thought these days. Legislation is mostly seen as a stepping stone; it's not until it's been tested in court that a law is really valid.
Yes, I half expect to see something like:
//Not sure what this line of code does, but if you
//delete it, you'll break the whole application
Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind
#113It is worth noting that the first two issues were settled via Constitutional Amendments, whereas the second two were decided by the Supreme Court. If I were a betting man, I would bet that the SSM issue will also be settled by the Supreme Court, not by Constitutional Amendment. It seems that, as a nation, we Americans can no longer settle divisive national (and therefore Federal) issues via the democratic process env…
Correction: It was Supreme Court Justice Stanley Reed [1], not Chief Justice Earl Warren [2], who "expressed concern that if the Court's power became too widespread, America would have, instead of democracy, kritarchy". He did so in late July 1953, specifically regarding the not-yet-decided Brown v. Board of Eduction decision of May 1953, in a discussion with one of his law clerks, John David Fassett. He confronted Fassett with the question, "Are you one of those people who believes in krytocracy?" Apparently, he discussed this question at length with his law clerks in the months leading up to the Brown decision. I could find no evidence that he spoke with his Supreme Court colleagues about it, but, then again, I've done no real research.
Also according to Fassett, in a February 1953 memo--three months before the Brown ruling--fellow Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson [3] used the term "a ruthless use of judicial power." Although Jackson did not use the term "krytocracy," Fassett commented, "That was sort of Justice Reed's feeling too--his krytocracy thought was the same thing."
I found all of the above in this article [4].
Finally, it is worth noting that, regardless of certain Justices' concerns about the Constitutional limits of judicial authority, the Brown v. Board of Education ruling overturned Plessy v. Ferguson by a unanimous vote, 9-0.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Forman_Reed
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Warren
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_H._Jackson
[4] http://www.roberthjackson.org/files/theman/speeches-articles...
Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
In America, there's no longer much legitimacy placed in legislation; we generally look to the judiciary for any actual governing thought these days. Legislation is mostly seen as a stepping stone; it's not until it's been tested in court that a law is really valid.
Yes, I half expect to see something like: //Not sure what this line of code does, but if you //delete it, you'll break the whole application in a bill one day.
Nice analogy. Legislature writes the source code of the law and the judiciary tries their damnedest to compile it into an executable program, rejecting the parts that they can't make sense of.
Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
In America, there's no longer much legitimacy placed in legislation; we generally look to the judiciary for any actual governing thought these days. Legislation is mostly seen as a stepping stone; it's not until it's been tested in court that a law is really valid.
I find that sort of statement deeply disturbing.
It's also encouraging in a way. It's good to know that there are checks in place to prevent the enforcement of laws that violate our fundamental rights.
Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind
#116Hmm. This seems to focus on a few issues that neatly fall into a sense of "progress" in social change, in which something changes in a number of states culminating in a Supreme Court decision that causes that change to affect the entire country. However, it ignores some issues that don't fall into such a pattern. For example, the issue of teaching evolution vs. creation in public schools; where teaching about evoluti…
I don't think capital punishment and creationism follow the same trend as women's suffrage, interracial marriage, etc. The issues in the article started with low state-level support and rapidly gained acceptance across the country; at some threshold the Supreme Court stepped in and said "this is now accepted as law nation-wide.
I don't have the numbers to back this up, but I don't think creation teaching and capital punishment started at a low level of support and rapidly ramped up across many states. State-level legislation on creation-teaching is limited to a few conservative areas. Capital punishment has been around forever and support for it has fluctuated with the times.
I agree that abortion doesn't really fit the pattern of the other issues in the article, though. Supreme court approval seems to have come prematurely in that case.
Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind
#117Hmm. This seems to focus on a few issues that neatly fall into a sense of "progress" in social change, in which something changes in a number of states culminating in a Supreme Court decision that causes that change to affect the entire country. However, it ignores some issues that don't fall into such a pattern. For example, the issue of teaching evolution vs. creation in public schools; where teaching about evoluti…
[deleted]
Re: This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I half expect to see something like: //Not sure what this line of code does, but if you //delete it, you'll break the whole application in a bill one day.
Nice analogy. Legislature writes the source code of the law and the judiciary tries their damnedest to compile it into an executable program, rejecting the parts that they can't make sense of.
Oh dear, no.
Legislature is the business people. The executive is the developers. The judiciary is the test team. That's how it's designed in the Constitution. The "original intent" of the judiciary was to be the guys waving their hands frantically saying, "Uh, this is a bug," while being completely ignored because there's a ship date to meet.