• beardown@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Obviously they haven’t issued an opinion, but their comments today make it clear what they’re going to do

    My point is that you can’t put forth any authoritative argument on this matter when SCOTUS is just going to rule for Trump. And they ultimately decide what the Constitution means and does not mean.

    Legally, they are sovereign over the interpretation of all aspects of the constitution. So saying that they’re being hypocritical or are ignoring precedent isn’t really relevant. They’re allowed to do that.

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      And if they do, it becomes one more reason to alter the court to fix their corrupt behavior

    • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Legally even that is pretty dubious. Didn’t they just randomly give themselves that power once and we all agreed to let them have it?

      • beardown@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        It is true that the Constitution does not explicitly grant SCOTUS the power of judicial review. SCOTUS granted itself that power in Marbury v Madison, which was 225+ years ago

        Libs should bring that up more often tbh. As should textualists, tbh