4 ms·

True, but irrelevant, since SCOTUS does not need to run for re-election.

kennywinker 4y ago
The court, like so many parts of government, only works if people believe in it to some degree. Like, you don't have to agree with the ruling to agree that it was considered fairly or without political or religious biases interfering. Without that trust, the court's actions/words are just a threat of state violence.
- hackyhacky 4y ago
  I don't see a realistic path for popular opinion to overturn a bad SCOTUS decision, no matter how egregious. We are way beyond an Andrew Jackson "The Supreme Court has made its decision, now let them enforce it" type moment.
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    > I don't see a realistic path for popular opinion to overturn a bad SCOTUS decision, SCOTUS rules on what laws mean. People can demand legislators change those laws.
    - hackyhacky 4y ago
      ... and SCOTUS can freely misinterpret those changed laws, as well. Remember Shelby v Holder, when SCOTUS struck down an unambiguous law, unanimously passed by Congress, previously held as constitutional? Don't tell me Congress can override SCOTUS when they obviously can't.
      - MichaelCollins 4y ago
        Sure they can. It doesn't always work, but that doesn't mean it never works. You might as well say that seatbelts don't work because you can cite a few cases where people died anyway. And if popular support were really overwhelmingly in one direction, a constitutional amendment can change what the constitution says. Constitutional amendments can make the unconstitutional become constitutional, and vice versa. Constitutional amendments aren't easy to pass, but that's by design. The constitution should only be amended when popular support is overwhelmingly in favor of it, and when that occurs, it's possible.
  - kennywinker 4y ago
    I was thinking more along the lines of civil disobedience. The court has changed our norms and understanding of what society is supposed to look like and do... for instance when it integrated a segregated society. It can't do that if people resist what it says because they see their decisions not as what's "right" but as partisan actions

The court, like so many parts of government, only works if people believe in it to some degree. Like, you don't have to agree with the ruling to agree that it was considered fairly or without political or religious biases interfering. Without that trust, the court's actions/words are just a threat of state violence.

hackyhacky 4y ago
I don't see a realistic path for popular opinion to overturn a bad SCOTUS decision, no matter how egregious. We are way beyond an Andrew Jackson "The Supreme Court has made its decision, now let them enforce it" type moment.
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  > I don't see a realistic path for popular opinion to overturn a bad SCOTUS decision, SCOTUS rules on what laws mean. People can demand legislators change those laws.
  - hackyhacky 4y ago
    ... and SCOTUS can freely misinterpret those changed laws, as well. Remember Shelby v Holder, when SCOTUS struck down an unambiguous law, unanimously passed by Congress, previously held as constitutional? Don't tell me Congress can override SCOTUS when they obviously can't.
    - MichaelCollins 4y ago
      Sure they can. It doesn't always work, but that doesn't mean it never works. You might as well say that seatbelts don't work because you can cite a few cases where people died anyway. And if popular support were really overwhelmingly in one direction, a constitutional amendment can change what the constitution says. Constitutional amendments can make the unconstitutional become constitutional, and vice versa. Constitutional amendments aren't easy to pass, but that's by design. The constitution should only be amended when popular support is overwhelmingly in favor of it, and when that occurs, it's possible.
- kennywinker 4y ago
  I was thinking more along the lines of civil disobedience. The court has changed our norms and understanding of what society is supposed to look like and do... for instance when it integrated a segregated society. It can't do that if people resist what it says because they see their decisions not as what's "right" but as partisan actions