291–300 of 1001 posts
I feel like a lot of people here would do well to try and understand the role of the Supreme Court, instead of treating it like a second version of Congress.
> instead of treating it like a second version of Congress. what do you mean specifically?
So to recap: the SCOTUS has ruled that the agency established and authorized by Congress to regulate environmental protection does not have the authority to regulate environmental protection. Did I get that right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm old enough to remember when I could grudgingly accept that there was some wisdom in decisions I disagreed with, even if perhaps not enough to sway me. But I could see something argued intelligently. This is just nakedly partisan stuff going on. I think viewing it through that lens - "we're going to do what we want because it fits our politics" - makes the most sense.
> This is just nakedly partisan stuff going on. The problem is much of the left’s gains over the last few decades have been based on shaky legal/constitutional ground. Even leftist judges like Ginsberg admitted that, and they were counting on the mistakes being in place for too long to correct (precedent). Now all that technical debt is coming back to kick our ass. This isn’t the end of the world though, Congress can…
>This isn’t the end of the world though, Congress can fix everything that’s happened in the last few weeks via proper laws.
No, this us pretty much what the end of the world looks like.
These guys are on a roll. Yesterday was giving states legal rights over indigenous nations. Today this. I was already planning to expat soon, but this all makes me want to try to hurry that timeline. Sorry to those of you that are stuck in this hellscape.
I'd like to caution other people who are feeling despondent and thinking of leaving that this is exactly what they want. They want you to give them your homes, your relationships, your friends, your resources, your job and everything you've cared about. So instead of being cynical and celebrating people who are abandoning ship, which I totally understand, we should instead spend time uniting people in opposition. Sta…
Could you clarify who "they" is in:
> this is exactly what they want.
?
And are you being a little hyperbolic (nothing wrong with that, we all do it especially when impassioned) or do you really think the supreme court (or whoever "they" is) are trying to cause an exodus of people they disagree with?
I'm not challenging/disagreeing with you, just very interested in understanding your thinking.
PDF of the ruling: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf As usual, it’s more nuanced than the headline.
I agree with "congress cannot delegate it's powers" to a certain extent. Negative example: The BATF has a splendid history of literally doing nothing except putting it's critics behind bars, while solving 0 actual crime and preventing any sort of mass tradgedies. Positive example: The FAA has done an incredible job making air-travel safer than car travel. I have a feeling that a lot of the higher-ups are former engin…
737MAX enters the chat
I feel like a lot of people here would do well to try and understand the role of the Supreme Court, instead of treating it like a second version of Congress.
It is a side-channel for lawyers and activists on all sides of the political spectrum to achieve what they couldn't achieve in the legislature.
Judicial review was a mistake.
I feel like a lot of people here would do well to try and understand the role of the Supreme Court, instead of treating it like a second version of Congress.
That's too complicated for most people. Although it does pain me to see people using their energy so ineffectively. Protester: "6 unelected officials can't decide what I can do!" Supreme Court: "That's literally what we just said!" If Congress punts issues around indefinitely for its own political wheeling and dealing, it still cannot outsource a decision on those issues to other branches of the federal government. W…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The constitution isn't partisan though.
Even if that was true, which it isn't, the interpretation of the constitution undeniably is.