The major question doctrine acts as a “get-out-of-text-free card” that conservative justices make “magically appear” whenever they see an executive branch policy that goes against their ideological “goals,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote in a dissent in the 2022 case of West Virginia v. EPA.
Apparently legislating from the bench is fine for Conservatives as long as you make up your own judicial doctrine as justification.
I don’t know how we fix the problems we face. The court is seated by politicians, Congress is seated by grifters and ideologues, and the people are too defeated/controlled to make meaningful changes.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Apparently legislating from the bench is fine for Conservatives as long as you make up your own judicial doctrine as justification.
I don’t know how we fix the problems we face. The court is seated by politicians, Congress is seated by grifters and ideologues, and the people are too defeated/controlled to make meaningful changes.