3 ms·
>The purpose of SCOTUS isn’t to rule based on what the desired outcome is, it’s to rule based on what the law explicitly does say and is permitted to say per th
by philosopher1234 4y ago
>The purpose of SCOTUS isn’t to rule based on what the desired outcome is, it’s to rule based on what the law explicitly does say and is permitted to say per the Constitution
I claim they have never done this. That every ruling has had an eye towards the outcome, whether stated or unstated, and that when they claim to be acting as mechanistic evaluators they are attempting to hide their interest in the effect they're having.
Besides, its a terrible idea. The real effects of their rulings matter much more than the philosophy.
- specialist 4y agoWRT so-called "textualism" and "originalism", I fully agree.
- pfortuny 4y agoThe burden of proof on such a sweeping statement is clearly on you…
- philosopher1234 4y agoHow do you prove whats in anothers heart? Its not provable. But if you dont try and figure it out, you can't understand the world. If you don't think its true, why not?
- hcurtiss 4y ago
- rayiner 4y ago> Besides, its a terrible idea. The real effects of their rulings matter much more than the philosophy. If that's your view, then we should just abolish courts. What's the point of having unelected legislators?
- philosopher1234 4y agoYour counter argument is that this implies uncomfortable things about our social structure?