Hacker News Reader

Comment by rootusrootus | Hacker News Reader

> given the glacial pace of constitutional law review

OTOH, the SCOTUS has achieved a political supermajority and will probably move much faster with policy changes now.

The Supreme Court does not make policy, at most it stops other branches from making certain kind of policies, when presented an opportunity to do so when resolving an actual case or controversy.

Stopping certain forms of policy and not others is a way to make policy.

Shape policy but not make policy.

Shaping policy is making policy, practically.

Shaping material given happens at the end after the material is formed.

A judge answers the question someone else asks.

They can deny policy based on existing policy.

Our current Supreme Court is creating policy from whole cloth while entirely ignoring precedent, and the text of law as a flagrant act of partisan pandering in their recent vax || test ruling.

Not to mention the "states can break constitutional protections by simply paying third parties in civil suits" thing.

"does not" or "should not" ?

SCOTUS can also roll back existing policy. The power to flip a bit is effectively power to make policy.

Not autonomously. The Supreme Court can only hear cases which are brought to it -- it cannot "make policy" in the absence of a relevant case.

The SC receives an enormous number of cases most of which it declines to hear. It has a lot of authority over what is brought before it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com