4 ms·
But what if the court were being intentionally obtuse and kept interpreting laws in face of the facts and the intent of congress? You need to consider this as s
by R0b0t1 6y ago
But what if the court were being intentionally obtuse and kept interpreting laws in face of the facts and the intent of congress? You need to consider this as something less brazen could be used to undermine congress' authority.
The judicial branch de facto has the most power of any branch in the US. The positions are not elected.
- pdonis 6y ago> what if the court were being intentionally obtuse and kept interpreting laws in face of the facts and the intent of congress? Arguably the court has been doing that in many cases for a long time. But I don't think the court was doing that in this particular case. The only recourse is to change, over time, who sits on the court. > The judicial branch de facto has the most power of any branch in the US. Yes, agreed.
- rileymat2 6y agoIf there was something like that, congress can impeach judges.
- astura 6y agoFederal judges can be impeached
- learnstats2 6y ago> But what if the court were being intentionally obtuse and kept interpreting laws in face of the facts and the intent of congress? This would apply for whichever organisation is responsible for interpreting the existing law: there has to be some such organisation, with significant political power: especially where this power is centralised as in the US Supreme Court, rather than distributed. Giving the executive this power, of unlimited re-interpretation the words of its previous incarnations, seems unwise and worse. Should congress be able to say about the negotations of its predecessors, "ah, in retrospect the previous session didn't mean it like that"? This is recognised as judicial independence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_independence#Theory_of_judicial_independence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_independence#Theory_o...
- pdonis 6y ago> Giving the executive this power I think you mean the legislative branch, since you say "Congress". Although the way most "law" is made now, Congress delegates so much of the details to executive agencies that the executive arguably does have the de facto power to re-interpret the laws passed by Congress.
- learnstats2 6y agoThanks for the correction :)