5 ms·
>> this Court is going to get one of the thicker chapters in the history books with all the precedents they have, or expected to, overturn This is false. The R
by rufus_foreman 3y ago
>> this Court is going to get one of the thicker chapters in the history books with all the precedents they have, or expected to, overturn
This is false. The Roberts court has overruled previous decisions less often than previous courts, not more often. It will have one of the thinnest chapters in the history books, not one of the thickest.
The Burger court overruled more decisions from 1969 to 1975 than the Roberts court has since it began in 2005. The Warren court has the thickest chapter in the history books. It overruled decisions at a higher rate than even the Burger court.
I am guessing that the real difference is that you agree with the major decisions of the Warren, Burger, and Rehnquist courts, and disagree with the major decisions of the Roberts court.
- lovich 3y agoNah, went through what 18 years of relatively little rocking the boat in overturning precedence and then overturning roe v wade and now the chevron defense in 2-3 years? Maybe the courts history as a whole has less overturning but these past few years have been markedly faster
- rufus_foreman 3y ago>> and then overturning roe v wade Sure, that helps make my point, thanks. Planned Parenthood v. Casey overturned parts of Roe v. Wade. That was in 1992 under the Rehnquist court. If overturning precedence is bad, the Rehnquist court is bad for overturning parts of Roe v. Wade.
- lovich 3y ago> Sure, that helps make my point, thanks. Don’t believe it did. Feel free to explain. You know I’m referring to Dobbs and the implied chevron defense overturning in a short period after that political makeup of the court fundamentally changed.