The Future of the Supreme Court

VoodooAce

Emperor
Joined
Jun 1, 2001
Messages
1,894
Location
California
I don't want to hijack the other Supreme Court threads, and I think this topic deserves its own discussion.

What does the future hold? Is the Supreme Court destined from now on to be constantly overturning its own previous decisions based on how it leans at the time?

For instance, if W manages to get a staunch conservative in place will the court spend the next few years overturning decisions made in previous decades like Roe V Wade?

And what happens when the court swings back toward the liberal side...they'll overturn it again?

Is this good?
 
Since the judges are only interpreting the laws or the constitution, I see no problem in changing interpretations as long as they don't change every year. There has to be some continuity.
 
There is some degree of inertia in the U.S. government. While Clinton didn't like some of the policies set by Beorge Bush Sr., he didn't do very much to change all of them. He kept the same policy vis a vis sanctions on Iraq, for example.
 
VoodooAce said:
For instance, if W manages to get a staunch conservative in place will the court spend the next few years overturning decisions made in previous decades like Roe V Wade?

And what happens when the court swings back toward the liberal side...they'll overturn it again?

Is this good?


No. It's not as if the new person gets on the court and thinks 'Now I can make my mark!" It takes quite a whlie for a case to get passed all the way up to the Supreme.

Even if an uber-conservative were to be appointed, someone would have to bring suit for each case/issue in a state, it would have to pass local, county, and state supreme courts or the equivalent federal districts before appearing before the top court. Call it a minimum of 2 years unless it has special circumstances (presidential elections, etc.)

Besides, once something is ruled on, it builds case law. You don't often seee the top court reversing itself.

Add to this that no one can accurately predict how a judge will rule once (s)he attains the top seat. Plenty of judges have been appointed for their conservative views only to be shown to be moderate/progressive.

A best case scenario will be someone who Democrats can tolerate, but also a keen legal mind. Roe/Wade seems the litmus, but many rulings, including procedural law, are at stake. The cases the court refuses are as important as the ones it heres and abortion isn't the end all, be all of issues.



As for swinging back and is it good or not, we're talking lifetime appointments. If Presindent Bush can successfully nominate a conservative (or 2, more retirements are immenant). you will not see a liberal court for the next decade or 2.
 
This is what happens, Voodoo Ace, when the Supreme Court gets in the business of making law instead of interpreting it. Get used to it.
 
That’s the thing people can interrupt laws differently. One might say we have the right to privacy in our sexual lives, while another might say we don’t.

Think about the second Amendment. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”

Now in my opinion that does not allow all citizens to carry guns. I interrupt it as maintaining a unit of soldiers for defense of the state, much like the National Guard. Since we have a full time standing army, and the national guard I see no reason for normal citizens to carry weapons to guarantee the security of the US. But others interrupt it otherwise.
 
Top Bottom