4 ms·
Yes but people who have been listening have also been dreading this coming for years. The fact that they're consistently knocking over shelves doesn't make it b
by Spivak 2y ago
Yes but people who have been listening have also been dreading this coming for years. The fact that they're consistently knocking over shelves doesn't make it better.
We've known that Roe was on the chopping block, but it doesn't make it good law even if it's consistent with the conservative justices' goals.
- lolinder 2y agoLike I said, there are legitimate arguments to be made against this change, but a lot of people are quick to assume that the Court is out to get them. The cases that people would approve of if they heard about them get ignored by social media, instead focusing exclusively on the cases that undo some rights that had been established by judicial or executive precedent. So we end up in a place where a lot of commenters are under the false impression that the Court just hates ___ people, rather than seeing the whole picture of the court systematically rolling back judicial activist rulings and executive rule makings.
- jauntywundrkind 2y agoThe court seems intent on allowing judge shopping conservatives to gut any even mildly inconvenient law. Going back to a "balance" where judges interpret law and no one else creates massive ambiguity across courts & greatly degrades any ability to govern. That seems to be the fantasy world that some parts of America desire. And that this court is working towards, hard as it can. It interprets that only the court gets to allow or deny
- diffxx 2y agoI do not understand how you can not see this is an activist court. They have by fiat invented new judicial principles out of thin air: "history and tradition" and "major questions doctrine" come to mind. And they apply these arbitrary principles in a heavy handed, inconsistent and simultaneously predictable way while sanctimoniously acting as though we can't see what they are doing.
- GenerWork 2y ago>Yes but people who have been listening have also been dreading this coming for years. Why are they dreading this? I find it strange how so many people are upset that the Supreme Court is forcing Congress to do its job, which is pass laws.
- saint_fiasco 2y ago> forcing Congress to do its job > Why are they dreading this? You answered your own question there. Congress should do its job, but as a matter of fact it is not doing its job and it is not going to do its job anytime soon. The Court might be technically, legally, philosophically correct in removing the inelegant hacks that the previous courts set up to route around the fact that Congress does not do its job. But in the meantime, Congress is still not doing its job.
- GenerWork 2y agoI'm talking about the "people who have been listening to the court and dreading this". Who are these listeners who remain undefined? Are they congressmembers? Are they pundits?
- tankenmate 2y agoMainly corporate lawyers, legal scholars (mainly academic institutions), and public interest lawyers. The people in the trenches.
- saint_fiasco 2y agoThe obvious example is pro-choice people who wish that Congress would pass a law that favors their position, and have been forced to rely on weird Supreme Court rulings by activist judges instead. You can argue that the pro-choice people should just accept that Congress does not decide in their favor, that this is a democracy and in a democracy sometimes you lose. But it's not like Congress has decided in favor of their opponents either. They just decide nothing. If Congress actually decided one way or the other then at least people would know where they stand and could stop feeling anxious about it.
- torstenvl 2y agoVesting unreviewable legislative authority in unelected bureaucrats specifically chosen because of their long and close ties to the industries they are meant to regulate is anathema to every tenet of democracy. Good riddance.
- esoterica 2y agoRemoving Chevron deference moves authority from the administrative agencies to the courts, who are not only also unelected bureaucrats, they are more insulated from democratic forces since they have lifetime appointments. Agency heads are political appointments and change with every president.
- torstenvl 2y agoThey're judges, not bureaucrats; they cannot issue regulations governing people's behavior; and you entirely ignored "unreviewable."
- paulmd 2y agoYeah, grandparent is being infantilizing/patronizing