The Authority of the Court and the Peril of Politics
2021. g. sept. · Harvard University Press
4,5star
4 atsauksmes
E-grāmata
112
Lappuses
Par šo e-grāmatu
A sitting justice reflects upon the authority of the Supreme Court—how that authority was gained and how measures to restructure the Court could undermine both the Court and the constitutional system of checks and balances that depends on it.
A growing chorus of officials and commentators argues that the Supreme Court has become too political. On this view the confirmation process is just an exercise in partisan agenda-setting, and the jurists are no more than “politicians in robes”—their ostensibly neutral judicial philosophies mere camouflage for conservative or liberal convictions.
Stephen Breyer, drawing upon his experience as a Supreme Court justice, sounds a cautionary note. Mindful of the Court’s history, he suggests that the judiciary’s hard-won authority could be marred by reforms premised on the assumption of ideological bias. Having, as Hamilton observed, “no influence over either the sword or the purse,” the Court earned its authority by making decisions that have, over time, increased the public’s trust. If public trust is now in decline, one part of the solution is to promote better understandings of how the judiciary actually works: how judges adhere to their oaths and how they try to avoid considerations of politics and popularity.
Breyer warns that political intervention could itself further erode public trust. Without the public’s trust, the Court would no longer be able to act as a check on the other branches of government or as a guarantor of the rule of law, risking serious harm to our constitutional system.
A growing chorus of officials and commentators argues that the Supreme Court has become too political. On this view the confirmation process is just an exercise in partisan agenda-setting, and the jurists are no more than “politicians in robes”—their ostensibly neutral judicial philosophies mere camouflage for conservative or liberal convictions.
Stephen Breyer, drawing upon his experience as a Supreme Court justice, sounds a cautionary note. Mindful of the Court’s history, he suggests that the judiciary’s hard-won authority could be marred by reforms premised on the assumption of ideological bias. Having, as Hamilton observed, “no influence over either the sword or the purse,” the Court earned its authority by making decisions that have, over time, increased the public’s trust. If public trust is now in decline, one part of the solution is to promote better understandings of how the judiciary actually works: how judges adhere to their oaths and how they try to avoid considerations of politics and popularity.
Breyer warns that political intervention could itself further erode public trust. Without the public’s trust, the Court would no longer be able to act as a check on the other branches of government or as a guarantor of the rule of law, risking serious harm to our constitutional system.
Vērtējumi un atsauksmes
4,5
4 atsauksmes
Novērtējiet šo e-grāmatu
Izsakiet savu viedokli!
Informācija lasīšanai
Viedtālruņi un planšetdatori
Instalējiet lietotni Google Play grāmatas Android ierīcēm un iPad planšetdatoriem/iPhone tālruņiem. Lietotne tiks automātiski sinhronizēta ar jūsu kontu un ļaus lasīt saturu tiešsaistē vai bezsaistē neatkarīgi no jūsu atrašanās vietas.
Klēpjdatori un galddatori
Varat klausīties pakalpojumā Google Play iegādātās audiogrāmatas, izmantojot datora tīmekļa pārlūkprogrammu.
E-lasītāji un citas ierīces
Lai lasītu grāmatas tādās elektroniskās tintes ierīcēs kā Kobo e-lasītāji, nepieciešams lejupielādēt failu un pārsūtīt to uz savu ierīci. Izpildiet palīdzības centrā sniegtos detalizētos norādījumus, lai pārsūtītu failus uz atbalstītiem e-lasītājiem.
