3 ms·
That's true but a part of the general political tension between parties is, at least in theory, to what extent law is interpreted by judges vs written by politi
by repolfx 8y ago
That's true but a part of the general political tension between parties is, at least in theory, to what extent law is interpreted by judges vs written by politicians.
The theory is that laws should be written by politicians and merely applied to specific cases by judges, because politicians are accountable and judges are not.
When you have laws that state virtually nothing and rely entirely on interpretation, that's the same thing as moving power away from elected political bodies and into unaccountable elites. This is, not coincidentally, exactly what the entire EU project seems to be constantly engaged in, so it's perhaps no surprise that the EU particularly enjoys passing vague laws that move power away from national politicians and towards the Commission and ECJ (the ECJ judges are appointed by the same process that decides the makeup of the Commission).
- dragonwriter 8y ago> That's true but a part of the general political tension between parties is, at least in theory, to what extent law is interpreted by judges vs written by politicians. In the US, at least, that's true in the rhetoric of one of the parties, but the opposing party doesn't argue the opposite side, just argues that the side that claims it is an issue is hypocritical in its rhetorical stance.