The executive power being vested in a single person is a much bigger issue on paper. Jackson already proved the Supreme Court is toothless even when it works as intended.
This is the supreme court working as intended. The Supreme Court was intended as a backstop against democracy, not a system to preserve it. Less than 7% of the population was allowed to vote at the US’ founding, does that sound like a country founded by people who gave a single solitary fuck about anything besides protecting their control over “their” women and slaves?
I think what they are saying is that SCOTUS could simply declare someone (like the current president) to be king if they wanted, because there is no legal check on their authority
Of course. But Jackson proved you don’t even need a corrupt Supreme Court. The executive branch led by one person can decide not to enforce their ruling. I think our impeachment mechanism for removing someone from power isn’t enough to prevent a dictatorship (or even fraud in the case of Santos and Fetterman). Outside of federal judges who have very little political capital, there’s been zero full impeachments + removals of federal officials. I’m not counting resignations before removal in that.
Yup. We need a method of removing justices who ignore the literal text of the document in favor of their own opinions. The birthright citizenship thing is the hole that’s going to sink our country. It’s only a matter of time before some originalist decides that, while the first amendment literally includes the phrase “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” the founding fathers would have really wanted us to jail all the catholics.
I always wonder it’s what we see now.
Supreme court justices are lifetime appointments and can freely reinterpret the law to mean what ever they want.
The executive power being vested in a single person is a much bigger issue on paper. Jackson already proved the Supreme Court is toothless even when it works as intended.
This is the supreme court working as intended. The Supreme Court was intended as a backstop against democracy, not a system to preserve it. Less than 7% of the population was allowed to vote at the US’ founding, does that sound like a country founded by people who gave a single solitary fuck about anything besides protecting their control over “their” women and slaves?
I think what they are saying is that SCOTUS could simply declare someone (like the current president) to be king if they wanted, because there is no legal check on their authority
Of course. But Jackson proved you don’t even need a corrupt Supreme Court. The executive branch led by one person can decide not to enforce their ruling. I think our impeachment mechanism for removing someone from power isn’t enough to prevent a dictatorship (or even fraud in the case of Santos and Fetterman). Outside of federal judges who have very little political capital, there’s been zero full impeachments + removals of federal officials. I’m not counting resignations before removal in that.
all while lying about “considering xyz settled law” or “boofing in college” before being sworn in
Yup. We need a method of removing justices who ignore the literal text of the document in favor of their own opinions. The birthright citizenship thing is the hole that’s going to sink our country. It’s only a matter of time before some originalist decides that, while the first amendment literally includes the phrase “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” the founding fathers would have really wanted us to jail all the catholics.