From xxxxxx <[email protected]>
Subject How To Discipline a Rogue Supreme Court
Date June 27, 2022 6:45 AM
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
[The power to check the Supreme Court is there, in the
Constitution. The task now is to seize it.]
[[link removed]]

HOW TO DISCIPLINE A ROGUE SUPREME COURT  
[[link removed]]


 

Jamelle Bouie
June 25, 2022
New York Times
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ The power to check the Supreme Court is there, in the Constitution.
The task now is to seize it. _

, Stefani Reynolds for The New York Times

 

The Supreme Court does not exist above the constitutional system.

It can shape the constitutional order, it can say what the
Constitution means, but it cannot shield itself from the power of the
other branches. The Supreme Court can be checked and the Supreme Court
can be balanced.

It is tempting, in the immediate wake of the court’s ruling in Dobbs
v. Jackson Women’s Health, to say that there’s nothing to be done
about the reactionary majority on the court. But that’s just not
true. The Constitution provides a number of paths by which Congress
can restrain and discipline a rogue court.

It can impeach and remove justices. It can increase or decrease the
size of the court itself (at its inception, the Supreme Court had only
six members). It can strip the court of its jurisdiction over certain
issues or it can weaken its power of judicial review by requiring a
supermajority of justices to sign off on any decision that overturns a
law. Congress can also rebuke the court with legislation that simply
cancels the decision in question.

In the face of a reckless, reactionary and power-hungry court,
Congress has options. The problem is politics. Despite the arrogance
of the current Supreme Court — despite its almost total lack of
democratic legitimacy — there is little to no appetite within the
Democratic Party for a fight over the nature of the court and its
place in our constitutional system. For many Democrats, President
Roosevelt’s attempt to expand the size of the court is less a
triumph than a cautionary tale — a testament to the limits of
presidential leadership and presidential power.

But Roosevelt did eventually get a Supreme Court that allowed most of
the New Deal to stand. The threat worked. The court was humbled.

It will take time to build the kind of power and consensus needed to
make significant changes to the court. But even the work of amassing
that power and putting that consensus together can stand as a credible
threat to a Supreme Court that has acted, under conservative control,
as if it stands above the constitutional system, unaccountable to
anyone other than itself.

The power to check the Supreme Court is there, in the Constitution.
The task now is to seize it.

* Supreme Court
[[link removed]]
* U.S. Constitution
[[link removed]]
* democracy
[[link removed]]
* Democrats
[[link removed]]
* Politics
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]
Screenshot of the email generated on import

Message Analysis

  • Sender: Portside
  • Political Party: n/a
  • Country: United States
  • State/Locality: n/a
  • Office: n/a
  • Email Providers:
    • L-Soft LISTSERV