Hacker News Reader

Comment by ohboii20202 | Hacker News Reader

ohboii20202

It's time to de-sanctify the Supreme Court.

I really don't like having this unelected councils of wizards who get wield god-like "authority"-- it feels a bit gross in a democracy.

I 'get it' w/ respect BrownvBoard, Miranda, etc, but at least in my lifetime the court hasn't done much to expand or protect my rights. Greatest hits from them are weird election cases (Florida 2000) making it easier for really shadowy/fucked organizations to plow $$$ into elections.

If these folks are indeed just umpires & good old legal "scholars" who are there to call balls & strikes, why are hundreds of millions dollars spent promoting + grooming these individuals?

Going forward I'm very much in favor of subtle "judicial humiliation"-- across the board de-sanctify this institution

Step 0-- make 'em take C-SPAN cameras

View on HN

>>I really don't like having this unelected councils of wizards who get wield god-like "authority"

but you are OK with the 'unelected council of wizards' at the EPA wielding their god-like authority instead?

This is an incorrect summary of the EPA. The EPA can only act according to laws passed by Congress, which is an elected body. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Environmental_Pr...

If it's backed by scientific consensus? absolutely.

Congress delegated their authority to the EPA. Congress is empowered to retain that authority and they're empowered to overrule any EPA regulation they disagree with. Congress retains all the power.

When it comes to the Supreme Court - that's it. Congress can't do anything about Supreme Court rulings. Your comparison of the EPA to the Supreme Court is misguided.

>>Congress can't do anything about Supreme Court rulings.

Actually, they can, that is the whole point - congress has the power to pass laws - SC does not. That is exactly what the SC just told congress to do - their job.

If Congress is adhering to their oath and acting in good faith then they may not pass laws that violate the Constitution. The Supreme Court determines what the Constitution does or doesn't say, which impacts the laws Congress may or may not pass. Putting this together we conclude Congress can't do anything about Supreme Court rulings.

Congress can amend the constitution.

Congress can’t just say “do whatever you want to fix X problem”. They have to be explicit with what powers they delegate to the executive branch and what they are permitted to do. Otherwise the law is plain unconstitutional since breaks the fundamental separation of powers. The purpose of SCOTUS is not to decide cases based on the desired outcome. It’s to decide based on what the law actually says, not what it should say.

> gross in a democracy.

It is happening at the state level too. In Wisconsin, the gerrymandered (google it for background on Wisconsin) legislature has chosen to not conduct hearings on governor appointees, with the result that holdovers from prior administrations can remain in office indefinitely.

""(T)he expiration of Prehn's term on the DNR Board does not create a vacancy. Prehn lawfully retains his position on the DNR Board as a holdover," wrote Chief Justice Annette Ziegler for the majority. "Therefore, the Governor cannot make a provisional appointment to replace Prehn." [1]

[1] https://www.wpr.org/wisconsin-supreme-court-rules-former-hea...

"I really don't like having this unelected councils of wizards who get wield god-like "authority"-- it feels a bit gross in a democracy."

So you feel the Cabinet posts should also be elected positions?

YES.

Start with the Secretary of the Treasury and move on to the Secretary of Defense and HHS.

The sooner the better.

Add to that list - Ferguson, Korematsu, Dredd Scott. You can keep going.

Ironically, I think you are agreeing with the court right now - They don't want the power that the court has previously taken.

Overturn Marbury vs Madison.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com