16 ms·
Who cares. The supreme court has lost all credibility and has become just another political arm.
by purple_ferret 4y ago
Who cares. The supreme court has lost all credibility and has become just another political arm.
- cocacola1 4y agoInsofar as I see it, the Court lost its credibility since Dred Scott.
- refurb 4y agoHuman institutions aren’t perfect? Throw them all out!
- cocacola1 4y agoAs soon as there's a better option, certainly.
- johnnyanmac 4y agoI feel like "impartial AI judge" is at least the top 3 most common sci-fi topics. I've yet to see a work that puts such a concept in a good light. Even if humans are prone to corruption, the theoretical point of a judicial system is to deal with the edge cases that are never clear cut.
- rayiner 4y agoThe irony of this line of argument is that an “impartial AI judge” never would have created Roe in the first place. A computer wouldn’t conjure up a right to abortion that’s not expressly listed in the constitution from a right to privacy that’s also not expressly listed in the constitution but is instead conjured up from the “penumbras” of listed rights. Only a human would do such a thing.
- ceejayoz 4y agoThe Constitution was explicitly not a “here are your rights, and only these ones” document. The Ninth Amendment states: > The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
- rayiner 4y agoSure—but those other rights must still exist and come from somewhere. Where does the right to abortions until viability come from?
- ceejayoz 4y agoThe same place my right to pick my nose, eat creme brulee, and hug my kids come from. It doesn't have to be written down for it to be one.
- vanattab 4y agoBut you don't have an inaliable right to creme brulee do you? If the FDA/Congress decides dairy should no longer be sold or consumed in the USA then they can pass a rule/law and it would almost certainly be upheld as constitutional. All the politicians might get thrown out by the cheese lovers in the next election. But it would be perfectly legal. The constitution I think is referring to other rights established in English common law previously?
- ceejayoz 4y agoUnenumerated rights are implied, inferred, etc. The right to vote, for example, isn't actually in the Constitution (eligibility is left to the States, and various amendments only forbid certain types of discrimination in eligibility), but everyone agrees it exists to some extent. Similarly, a right to privacy of some level is generally considered to stem from the Fourth Amendment. The right to freedom of movement is inferred from the Privileges and Immunities Clause. An attempt by the FDA to ban dairy would likely meet Constitutional challenges, and I'd expect SCOTUS to find some way to deem it a legislative overreach. English common law has meaning in the US because of State-level actions, not Federal/Constitutional. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reception_statute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reception_statute (Entertainingly, this means oddities like theoretically having the right to trial by combat in Virginia.)
- tbrownaw 4y agoThe "smart contract" stuff from the cryptocoin crowd is more-or-less an attempt at actually doing the "impartial AI judge" thing. I suppose it'll be interesting to see if they get it sufficiently free of bugs and surprise edge cases that it's useful for more than enthusiasts or people doing sketchy things. But it seems to be getting closer to the point where we can say AI judges are generally unwise based on real experiment rather than on thought experiment. (Assuming it turns out the way I expect.)
- s5300 4y agoThe whole case of Clarence Thomas’ wife Ginni Thomas is outright insane. Like, truth is stranger than fiction levels of insane. From what I learned of the Supreme Court in the most advanced classes offered at my highschool, to then seeing that debacle go down… Like, it’s impossible to not view the joint as one of the biggest jokes & public failures of our government. Furthermore, it’s very much an “and this is what’s in plain view” sort of thing. I, and I presume most HN users, have always known the US gov is a bit of a gigantic joke… but I can’t really imagine how much worse things probably are in private after seeing that play out.
- rayiner 4y agoIt takes some mental gymnastics to say that elective abortions to 24 weeks is a “human right” that’s so important it must be read into the Constitution—implying that countries like France, Denmark, Germany, Italy, and Spain are violating human rights by limiting abortions to the first trimester. But to go further and say the Supreme Court “has lost all credibility” by returning US law to the international norm—where abortion is a legislative determination—is breathtaking.
- adlfkjlkjlawe 4y ago
- slg 4y agoYou have to either be extremely naive or totally oblivious of the current political climate in the US to think this ends with only a ban on abortions after 24 weeks.
- rayiner 4y agoNo, I think “this ends up” the same way as Europe: most places get a ban at the end of the first trimester, when the fetus has a face and can suck its thumb. Some states ban it or near ban it, like Poland or Ireland until a couple of years ago. A handful of blue states end up with abortion until birth.
- parrellel 4y agoAlito is literally calling out gay marriage and contraception as on the chopping block in that thing. I think this ends up someplace very very ugly very quickly.
- spoils19 4y agoThis just reads like the slippery-slope fallacy. At no point will gay marriage and contraception be on the chopping block. I just talked to some conservative gay couples who align with this draft ruling, and they have no fears whatsoever.
- chanakya 4y agoThe attitude which results in this kind of extreme rhetoric and unjustified bashing of institutions will lead to the decline of the US. For a civilization to remain strong and flourish, it has to have some confidence in itself.
- HabiusRex 4y agowell said.
- seanp2k2 4y agoWhat if many don’t see it as unjustified? Given how the last few confirmations have gone, politicians seem to have even less respect for this institution in particular. They’ve shown the citizens how they will fight tooth and nail for every last drop of power they can grab onto. We will not remain strong and flourish; we’re more likely to have another civil war in the next few decades.
- IAmWorried 4y agoStupid take man. Even if they have "lost all credibility" in your eyes they still make decisions that have impact.
- fundad 4y agoBecause we comply. Look at how the right did away with mask mandates. And remember who needs to be up front.
- onesafari 4y agoIf that's true, the country is over. It's the last authoritative institution.
- NoSorryCannot 4y agoOverly dramatic. A lot of countries that are still countries have completely rewritten their constitutions a few times over.
- weakfish 4y agoAmericans can’t handle not being exceptional
- vkou 4y agoYou're calling it the last authoritative institution, when two of the last three appointments (Coney and Gorsuch) to it have been made through an utterly insane hypocritical[1], and blatantly partisan circus. [1] 2016 - It's inappropriate to do an appointment on election year! [2] [2] 2020 - Of course we will fast-track an appointment on election year!
- fundad 4y agoThe credibility of the court only matters to people who want Republican outcomes. I’ve always resented that we have no Federal legal protections for mixed marriage, birth control or abortion.