2 ms·
This seems like shooting the messenger to me. The problem is that the legislature hasn't done its job. It isn't the job of the judiciary to monkey-patch the l
by gwright 6y ago
This seems like shooting the messenger to me.
The problem is that the legislature hasn't done its job. It isn't the job of the judiciary to monkey-patch the law to get a desired outcome. They should be interpreting the law as written and any negative consequences should be addressed by legislation.
- abvdasker 6y ago"They should be interpreting the law as written and any negative consequences should be addressed by legislation." What good is the legislation when it get cuts to ribbons in the courts? Look at what happened to the ACA and the individual mandate. Even modest progressive legislation can barely survive the current court, so I'm not sure your proposed solution works. "interpreting the law as written" is a farce. The court is a minoritarian conservative bulwark that can rule however it wants with no accountability. The law is what they want it to be. Always has been.
- gwright 6y agoNot sure what to conclude from that. The standard positions seem to be: * the right is more in favor of originalism * the left is more in favor of the living constitution view You seem to be claiming that the right is actually acting in alignment with the living constitution view, which is an unusual take on this IMHO.
- abvdasker 6y agoI'm saying that the legal doctrines merely provide a veneer of rationalization for decisions obviously motivated by political ideology (on both sides). I'm saying the legal doctrine is totally irrelevant.