Ilya, thanks for analysis and perspective. The disrespect and the discrediting of the Supreme Court and the unfortunate amplifying of the far left’s rhetoric by the MSM is yet another example of the extreme politicization of almost everything in this era of extreme partisanship.
Disagreement buttressed by reasoned argument should be expected and in fact can be helpful in occasioning a wider public debate and understanding on these important issues , but inflammatory rhetoric for political purposes only pushes us further into our respective corners.
Unfortunately, the Court is not the only institution subject to similar attempts to discredit it. Another obvious example is the numerous attempts of both sides of the aisle to discredit and politicize the Federal Reserve, an institution of which I have been critical on many occasions, but in my opinion whose independence ( and that of central banks in general) is the least worst practical alternative for the management of monetary policy.
I have a question. If Trump wins and Republicans win the House and Senate, is there a way to make a law that preserves the Supreme Court and codifies the rules surrounding appointments?
Depends which rules. It would take a constitutional amendment to set the number of justices in stone. Most changes can be made with legislation, but the Dems would filibuster in the Senate.
Ilya, thanks for analysis and perspective. The disrespect and the discrediting of the Supreme Court and the unfortunate amplifying of the far left’s rhetoric by the MSM is yet another example of the extreme politicization of almost everything in this era of extreme partisanship.
Disagreement buttressed by reasoned argument should be expected and in fact can be helpful in occasioning a wider public debate and understanding on these important issues , but inflammatory rhetoric for political purposes only pushes us further into our respective corners.
Unfortunately, the Court is not the only institution subject to similar attempts to discredit it. Another obvious example is the numerous attempts of both sides of the aisle to discredit and politicize the Federal Reserve, an institution of which I have been critical on many occasions, but in my opinion whose independence ( and that of central banks in general) is the least worst practical alternative for the management of monetary policy.
Not surprisingly, I agree with you, Tucker!
I have a question. If Trump wins and Republicans win the House and Senate, is there a way to make a law that preserves the Supreme Court and codifies the rules surrounding appointments?
Depends which rules. It would take a constitutional amendment to set the number of justices in stone. Most changes can be made with legislation, but the Dems would filibuster in the Senate.