this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2023
580 points (97.5% liked)

politics

19089 readers
4231 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JustZ@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is a stupid, far right take. Marbury didn't set new precedent. It said what everyone already knew. Judicial review is part of western jurisprudence for centuries and centuries.

[–] Zron@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How is this far right? The right loves the current court, it’s their personal sledgehammer they can pull out to erode our freedoms whenever they wish.

Just because something had been done for a long time, doesn’t mean it’s a good thing.

For a long time, the west had kings as governments. We fought a war to get rid of that. The French started cutting off heads to end that.

For a long time, the church was a key government entity, our constitution explicitly states that the government is entirely separate to the church.

For a long time, common people had no rights to trial by peers or privacy in their own homes from the government. Again, we have an amendment that enshrines that.

The Supreme Court has been abusing their power too much and for too long. It needs to change, and one those changes should be to judicial review. No more legislation from the bench.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Dismantling the court because you don't understand judicial review is a far right position. They want power consolidated, not in a tripartite system of government.

[–] Zron@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

everything I don’t personally agree with is a far right position

Okay bud. I see I’m dealing with a highly intelligent being. After all, we definitely have a tripartite government when we have a legislative branch that makes laws and an unelected judicial branch that… also makes laws by deciding what is and isn’t constitutional and what rights are and aren’t protected by the constitution.

Yup, sure sounds like a totally fair and balanced system of government that definitely doesn’t need a major overhaul and sever limits places on it by the other branches.

But I guess actually wanting checks and balances is a far right position, so, according to you, shouldn’t be done.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Again, you don't understand judicial review.