I really can't come up with a well reasoned response as to why this is the worst idea I've ever heard. Damn. Can we please not use two Supreme Court rulings as reason for an amendment by calling it "Judicial Tyranny"?
[+]HappyExile0 points6 points6 points
ago
(edited ago)
[–]HappyExile0 points
6 points
6 points
(+6|-0)
ago
(edited ago)
Because the entire purpose of life-tenure for the Justices is so that they can make unpopular rulings to protect against the tyranny of the majority. If we could just elect judges that we wanted the Court would be much more politically driven then it already is.
The Justices shouldn't have to pander to the mob. They are not supposed to be politicians.
Unfortunately, Big money/corporations/oligarchs (illuminanti/annunaki? Who knows?) influence their decisions now, and their lifetime appointment prevents any correction to those Justices who turn to legislation for cash, influence, power, women, blackmail, etc.
[–] HappyExile 0 points 6 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago (edited ago)
Because the entire purpose of life-tenure for the Justices is so that they can make unpopular rulings to protect against the tyranny of the majority. If we could just elect judges that we wanted the Court would be much more politically driven then it already is.
The Justices shouldn't have to pander to the mob. They are not supposed to be politicians.
Read Federalist 78
[–] QuestionEverything ago (edited ago)
Unfortunately, Big money/corporations/oligarchs (illuminanti/annunaki? Who knows?) influence their decisions now, and their lifetime appointment prevents any correction to those Justices who turn to legislation for cash, influence, power, women, blackmail, etc.
[–] Oire 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Thanks for saying what I would if I wasn't slightly horrified.