If the US Supreme Court makes a totally crazy interpretation of the US constitution, for example if they declare Trump president for life etc, what happens next?
Does that just get accepted as the law of the land by all American law enforcement and lower courts?
Is the US constitution kind of worthless then, if the supreme court has no restrictions on how they interpret it? Does this mean if a president controls the supreme court and congress they can do whatever they want with no restrictions?
#AskFedi #USPolitics #USConstitution #Legal
jandi
in reply to FediThing 🏳️🌈 • • •Sensitive content
In my opinion, that's what the Roberts court really did with their infamous inmunity decision: They gave THEMSELVES (almost?) unlimited, unchecked authority, with their "inmunity but we have to uphold it" billiards.
Shame. Brace yourselves. Or better, elbows up.
FediThing 🏳️🌈
in reply to jandi • • •Sensitive content
I just have trouble understanding how they have no restrictions on their interpretations. How are they allowed to interpret it so that they get unlimited power?
Is there no mechanism to stop a court that has been bribed for example (which there is ample evidence of in recent years)?
I guess the assumption was that congress would step in?
jandi
in reply to FediThing 🏳️🌈 • • •Sensitive content
Oh, I'm by no means an expert, but yeah, it would be Congress who could/should restrict them, and it isn't expected that Congress is functional soon, so...
SNAFU, as they say.
Let's hope friction and gravity help. From outside (I'm in Spain), the blow to US democracy is damn hard. I wish I had answers.
Susan Singer
in reply to FediThing 🏳️🌈 • • •Sensitive content
There are three ways to “undo" a SCOTUS decision:
1. The Court can overturn its own decision.
2. Congress can pass a bill that contradicts the ruling.
3. Congress can draft a constitutional amendment that will not only overturn the decision, but make the change as close to permanent as is possible.
FediThing 🏳️🌈
in reply to Susan Singer • • •Sensitive content
@slsinger
Thanks! 🙏
Mike [SEC=OFFICIAL]
in reply to FediThing 🏳️🌈 • • •Sensitive content
the depressing answer is that no laws matter, the technicalities of the rules, who is technically allowed to do what - it's all meaningless. What matters is what the people with the guns will enforce.
Everyone looks up to the people above them in their chain of command and decides whether to go with their instructions or not. "Not" usually comes with serious and probably violent repercussions.
The Rule of Law is hanging by a thread over there.