Art, Writing, and Learning: The Clerisy Quarter > Discussion and Debate - The Philosopher's Plaza

US Politics 2022

(1/5) > >>

Jubal:
Somehow this thread hadn't started yet, which I guess shows us that we're not quite in the full Trump news cycle era anymore.

On the other hand, a leaked document suggests that the Supreme Court may well be going to strike down Roe vs. Wade, the decision that established a constitutional right to abortion, so that's pretty horrific. The US does feel like it's in a state where essentially its checks and balances system has broken in ways out of sync with any semblance of democracy, and this feels a fairly landmark moment in that: the vast majority of Americans think some abortions should be legal - only 13% say it should always be illega, which means there probably isn't a single US state where that's a majority view.

There's also of course the midterms looming, where it looks like the environment is Republican-leaning as a result of some dissatisfaction with Biden - he got hit pretty hard politically by the fallout from Kabul and Delta/Omicron, and his ratings have never really recovered. And he's governed from a fairly centrist position (backing away from campaign pledges like forgiveness of student loan debt) which has upset a lot of progressives, whilst it's not really clear who it's conversely satisfied, so that might make it tricky to get the Democrat base to turn out. In general folks I see from the US, and this being me that's mostly Democrat/liberal/left circles, seem to have a pretty despondent outlook at the moment and not feel like their vote is actually getting the things they want done even when they win, which is bad news if you're a party trying to hold power.

Jubal:
And it's happened: no constitutional right to control over your own body any more in the US. How utterly horrifying.

dubsartur:
Its unfortunate that since congress became paralyzed (maaybe one big new law per two years), and anything one president decrees the next president can undo, the Supreme Court has become the part of the US federal government which can most effectively make broad, lasting changes in policy.  Because its not really accountable to anything outside itself, either democratically or logically (the US constitution is rooted in 18th century thinking before the administrative state, truly universal human rights, etc. so constitutional law is either barbarous or intellectually shoddy). 

My understanding is that before the late 19th century, it was never a crime in Britain to end a pregnancy before the fetus started to move (the quickening).  So these state laws outlawing all abortion (and drafted federal laws sitting in desk drawers) are barbarous even by 18th century standards.

Edit: many US states are now more restrictive of abortion than the Islamic Republic of Iran and most Arab states.  Enuf said.

Jubal:
Yes - I mean, the Supreme Court can very much be held accountable under the US constitution, but only by the aforementioned paralysed congress which isn't going to do it.

dubsartur:

--- Quote from: Jubal on June 27, 2022, 02:14:18 PM ---Yes - I mean, the Supreme Court can very much be held accountable under the US constitution, but only by the aforementioned paralysed congress which isn't going to do it.

--- End quote ---
The only way which comes to mind is article 2, section 4 "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."  Maybe the justice whose wife was playing Robertspierre on 6 January and did not recuse himself from a case which turned out to involve her could be impeached, but for the rest being an authoritarian and/or misogynist is not a crime.  Kavanaugh seems to have a mysterious benefactor who helps with financial problems, but I doubt you could turn that into a bribery charge.  And it takes a majority vote among the Representatives and then among the Senators.

Not sure who would have to give their OK for expanding the court, but it would take a solid majority in the Senate to fill those appointments.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page