4 ms·

Seems surprising to me that the supreme court is so involved in this issue. In the United States, the supreme court tries its hardest to avoid answering a ques

Seems surprising to me that the supreme court is so involved in this issue. In the United States, the supreme court tries its hardest to avoid answering a question if it can, and certainly tries to avoid anything that looks like it's writing a new law. Can someone who is more knowledgeable comment on this?

svat 8y ago
In India, the Supreme Court is enthusiastically involved in many things. It considers it to be its job to keep the government honest, etc. See this blog post on the tenure of the most recent Chief Justice of India, by a lawyer and expert: https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2018/10/01/ends-without-means-outcomes-without-reasons-a-look-back-at-dipak-misra-and-the-constitution/ https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2018/10/01/ends-without-... (See also: https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2018/10/30/constituting-constitution-benches-the-dipak-misra-years/ https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2018/10/30/constituting-... )
- jeremysalwen 8y ago
  It seems to me based on the articles you linked that the Indian Supreme Court flagrantly disregards the constitution regularly!
najarvg 8y ago
Interesting that you bring it up. The Indian Supreme court has always been very active and seems to provide a sense of "balance" to the political chaos that is persistent. There was a very good (albeit very west-centric) article in NYT about this - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/27/world/asia/india-supreme-court-modi.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/27/world/asia/india-supreme-... I remember, back in 1995, reading a big banner hung up on a very prominent intersection in the downtown Mumbai area, that celebrated a supreme court decision on a controversial political corruption case by declaring "Thanks to the supreme court, India survives despite it's politicians. That, at that time, summed up the feelings of many urban middle class residents.
skissane 8y ago
Partly, it is because the US Constitution and Indian Constitution are very different documents. Look especially at Part IV of the Indian Constitution, "Directive Principles of State Policy". See for example Article 43 which requires the Indian government to endeavour to provide a living wage. So, the Indian Supreme Court gets to evaluate (if it wants to) whether the Indian government is doing enough to provide a living wage. By contrast, the US Constitution says nothing about a living wage, so the US Supreme Court has very little constitutional justification to get involved in wage policy. (Part IV is non-justiciable – you can't sue the government for violating it per se; but, nevertheless, the Courts are supposed to keep it in mind in their decision making, and so I think it does contribute to some of the substantial differences between Indian and American constitutional and judicial cultures.)

svat 8y ago

In India, the Supreme Court is enthusiastically involved in many things. It considers it to be its job to keep the government honest, etc. See this blog post on the tenure of the most recent Chief Justice of India, by a lawyer and expert: https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2018/10/01/ends-without-means-outcomes-without-reasons-a-look-back-at-dipak-misra-and-the-constitution/ https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2018/10/01/ends-without-... (See also: https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2018/10/30/constituting-constitution-benches-the-dipak-misra-years/ https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2018/10/30/constituting-... )

jeremysalwen 8y ago
It seems to me based on the articles you linked that the Indian Supreme Court flagrantly disregards the constitution regularly!

najarvg 8y ago

Interesting that you bring it up. The Indian Supreme court has always been very active and seems to provide a sense of "balance" to the political chaos that is persistent. There was a very good (albeit very west-centric) article in NYT about this - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/27/world/asia/india-supreme-court-modi.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/27/world/asia/india-supreme-... I remember, back in 1995, reading a big banner hung up on a very prominent intersection in the downtown Mumbai area, that celebrated a supreme court decision on a controversial political corruption case by declaring "Thanks to the supreme court, India survives despite it's politicians. That, at that time, summed up the feelings of many urban middle class residents.

skissane 8y ago

Partly, it is because the US Constitution and Indian Constitution are very different documents. Look especially at Part IV of the Indian Constitution, "Directive Principles of State Policy". See for example Article 43 which requires the Indian government to endeavour to provide a living wage. So, the Indian Supreme Court gets to evaluate (if it wants to) whether the Indian government is doing enough to provide a living wage. By contrast, the US Constitution says nothing about a living wage, so the US Supreme Court has very little constitutional justification to get involved in wage policy. (Part IV is non-justiciable – you can't sue the government for violating it per se; but, nevertheless, the Courts are supposed to keep it in mind in their decision making, and so I think it does contribute to some of the substantial differences between Indian and American constitutional and judicial cultures.)