3 ms·

> I hate this supreme court for overruling their own decisions Yeah. Based off the various deep dives I heard about a year ago, the court is supposed to strong

> I hate this supreme court for overruling their own decisions Yeah. Based off the various deep dives I heard about a year ago, the court is supposed to strongly favor leaving prior court rulings in place, but the current justices decided that they were fine changing prior rulings since it's a convention, not a rule. The current SC really dislikes all the prior rulings that were based off the 14th amendment, so I fully expect this same behavior to continue.

Timon3 3y ago
The problem goes further - a number of justices previously declared they'd honor the previous decisions. They should have lost the publics trust over that alone.
- falcolas 3y ago
  > They should have lost the publics trust over that alone. Public opinion - let alone public trust - does not matter to a Supreme Court justice; they're appointed by the government for life. There's literally nothing the public can do (short of revolution) that impacts their jobs. Only the opinions of the house/senate members even remotely matters to them, and so long as congress can't get enough votes to impeach them (a majority in the House, and 2/3 of the Senate), they can do pretty much whatever they want. Historically, no Supreme Court justice has ever been impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate. It's been around 200 years (1805) since the last attempt was even made.
  - Timon3 3y ago
    Public opinion and public trust absolutely do matter to the justices. They derive their mandate from the people. If the people really want to relieve a justice of their duty, they will find a way - "the government" can't exist without any public support. The Supreme Court is only the Supreme Court if enough people say it is.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > they’re appointed by the government for life. “In good behavior”, actually. > There’s literally nothing the public can do (short of revolution) that impacts their jobs. Political pressure on Congress to impeach a particular justice, or exercise its power to adjust the scope of the appellate jurisdiction of the Court, as well as taking direct extralegal action against specific judges are all acts “short of revolution”. > Historically, no Supreme Court justice has ever been impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate. It’s been around 200 years (1805) since the last attempt was even made. No, 1805 was the only successful impeachment of a Supreme Court justice, though no conviction occurred in the Senate. The last attempt (counting only those where there is some official action in the House directed explicitly directed at impeachment) was far more recent, 2019 against Justice Kavanaugh (H.Res. 560).
jwond 3y ago
The Supreme Court has a long history of overruling prior Supreme Court decisions, and has done so over 200 times. https://constitution.congress.gov/resources/decisions-overruled/ https://constitution.congress.gov/resources/decisions-overru...

Timon3 3y ago

The problem goes further - a number of justices previously declared they'd honor the previous decisions. They should have lost the publics trust over that alone.

falcolas 3y ago
> They should have lost the publics trust over that alone. Public opinion - let alone public trust - does not matter to a Supreme Court justice; they're appointed by the government for life. There's literally nothing the public can do (short of revolution) that impacts their jobs. Only the opinions of the house/senate members even remotely matters to them, and so long as congress can't get enough votes to impeach them (a majority in the House, and 2/3 of the Senate), they can do pretty much whatever they want. Historically, no Supreme Court justice has ever been impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate. It's been around 200 years (1805) since the last attempt was even made.
- Timon3 3y ago
  Public opinion and public trust absolutely do matter to the justices. They derive their mandate from the people. If the people really want to relieve a justice of their duty, they will find a way - "the government" can't exist without any public support. The Supreme Court is only the Supreme Court if enough people say it is.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > they’re appointed by the government for life. “In good behavior”, actually. > There’s literally nothing the public can do (short of revolution) that impacts their jobs. Political pressure on Congress to impeach a particular justice, or exercise its power to adjust the scope of the appellate jurisdiction of the Court, as well as taking direct extralegal action against specific judges are all acts “short of revolution”. > Historically, no Supreme Court justice has ever been impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate. It’s been around 200 years (1805) since the last attempt was even made. No, 1805 was the only successful impeachment of a Supreme Court justice, though no conviction occurred in the Senate. The last attempt (counting only those where there is some official action in the House directed explicitly directed at impeachment) was far more recent, 2019 against Justice Kavanaugh (H.Res. 560).

jwond 3y ago

The Supreme Court has a long history of overruling prior Supreme Court decisions, and has done so over 200 times. https://constitution.congress.gov/resources/decisions-overruled/ https://constitution.congress.gov/resources/decisions-overru...