Supremely Out of Proportion
Female Senators led by Mary Landrieu have written an open letter to resigning Supreme Court Justice O'Connor asking her to reconsider.
This probably won't surprise most people, of course, because the Supreme Court is the most politically divisive branch of the U.S. government.
But why? This should be the least divisive of the three branches. The high court exists only to judge existing laws. One would think that the American people would be focused on the lawmaking process more so than the lawjudging process if they were truly separated as the founders planned.
But they're not.
The Supreme Court has become a big player in the law making game. Policies such as abortion, gay marriage, education spending, property rights, freedom of speech and environmental protection are controlled or likely to be controlled primarily by state or federal courts.
The Supreme Court exists to settle debates, not create them, and it's no wonder that the aforementioned issues are as divisive and unstable as they are: the people and their elected officials have been circumvented by an unelected oligarchy.
That U.S. Senators would write an infantile plea to a Supreme Court Justice asking her to participate in what is effectively political trickery (ie, waiting until 2008 to resign) exposes how far out of proportion the court's importance has become.
This probably won't surprise most people, of course, because the Supreme Court is the most politically divisive branch of the U.S. government.
But why? This should be the least divisive of the three branches. The high court exists only to judge existing laws. One would think that the American people would be focused on the lawmaking process more so than the lawjudging process if they were truly separated as the founders planned.
But they're not.
The Supreme Court has become a big player in the law making game. Policies such as abortion, gay marriage, education spending, property rights, freedom of speech and environmental protection are controlled or likely to be controlled primarily by state or federal courts.
The Supreme Court exists to settle debates, not create them, and it's no wonder that the aforementioned issues are as divisive and unstable as they are: the people and their elected officials have been circumvented by an unelected oligarchy.
That U.S. Senators would write an infantile plea to a Supreme Court Justice asking her to participate in what is effectively political trickery (ie, waiting until 2008 to resign) exposes how far out of proportion the court's importance has become.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home