Let's Play A Game: What Would America Look Like If The Supreme Court (and Others) Could Not Overturn Popular Will

Let us ignore for a moment that this turd fished out of the Charles River and tossed into Harvard Yard did not argue something completely different just two years ago.

Harvard Law Prof Who Wanted to Unleash a Liberal Supreme Court Now Wants to 'Abolish' the Court

There are two components of the case for getting rid of judicial review. One is that, as a matter of basic democratic principle, the people ought to be able to consider policies and then vote on them without having the courts step in and say "no." So from a democratic point of view, it's hard to justify allowing the courts to single-handedly overrule popular will whenever they choose.

The second component is that judicial review may actually impair the public's ability to engage in serious thinking about what the Constitution means, and what we want to do in light of what we think our Constitution says. In a way, the Supreme Court simply takes on this conversation for itself, and leaves the citizenry as bystanders.

[Hat Tip: Jay Guevara]

&topic=world_news"> posted by CBD at 02:20 PM

| Access Comments