• ccunning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    …if a sane court is built around them by leaders with enough spine

    Lack of spine isn’t the issue. It’s lack of political power.

    And even then what would the new court do? If they go back to operating the way they did before this judicial coup, that wouldn’t actually fix any of the damage done. Or remove the traitor sitting on the SCOTUS.

    • retrospectology@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      A court with more judges would water down the influence of any extremists.

      But yes, packing the court alone doesn’t guaruntee the court can’t be captured again. What Elie Mystal suggested way back when the court majority had flipped was basically two things that should happen:

      1. expand the court by alot, maybe somewhere within 20-30, similar to the 9th circuit that’s just below the Supreme Court. This helps dilute the power of individual crazies like Alito and then

      2. Rotate judges out routinely to other federal positions. This allows for their life-time appointment still, but ensures also that, due to the high number of justices, every administration is getting an opportunity to appoint a few judges every time. That revolving door means it wpuld require multiple far-right administrations to pin the court down like it is now.

      There’s no reason the court needs to be nine justices, we’ve had more and less throughout our history as a nation, and there’s no reason that the courts power needs to be concentrated into the hands of so few individuals, since the purpose of the court is suppose to be a moderating force of legal scholars, not an explicitly partisan body.

      • ccunning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        None of this addresses my point. There isn’t the political power to do it.

        And even if there was, the court has already essentially overturned precedent as a concept. That can’t just be rolled back without completely reworking the court, which…see my first point…

        • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          3 days ago

          There isn’t the political power to do it.

          That’s the entire problem, full stop. This wouldn’t even have gotten to SCOTUS if Congress would have held POTUS accountable via impeachment. The reason Congress didn’t is partially due to political pressure from voters but mostly because the HoR is far too small to adequately represent 300,000,000 people.

        • retrospectology@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Yes, it depends up getting people out to vote, especially in mid-terms.

          Precedent is literally just a tradition that’s agreed upon, there’s nothing binding judges to adhere to it, which is why the supreme court was so easily able to ignore it.

          So in that sense it’s a double-edged sword, it’s just as easy for judges to rule by precedent as it is for them to not, it’s always been this way.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Lack of spine isn’t the issue. It’s lack of political power.

      The court literally just gave Biden the power.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        No, they get to decide what an official act is. So the only way this works out is Biden 66ing the extremist judges and the remaining vote that it was an official act. They get to decide what official acts are. So everyone Rubepublican has free reign and every democrat is boxed in.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          So the only way this works out is Biden 66ing the extremist judges and the remaining vote that it was an official act.

          Yep, that’s what I said: the court literally just gave Biden the power to do that.

          • Sanctus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            But, he could do anything else and they’d rule it as unofficial as long as they breathe

            • grue@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              3 days ago

              …as long as they breathe

              True, but they wouldn’t be anymore, in this hypothetical scenario. I’m not sure why we’re belaboring that point.

              • Sanctus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                The devil is in the details. If he just goes all willy nilly and not at the right people he wastes his opportunity. You can’t assassinate Trump as official because they wouldn’t deem it so. It matters because it means the only choice he is left with is to official order the extremists on the SC.