“And so it was no real surprise today when outgoing Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid predicted confidently that if his party regained control of the upper chamber, the filibuster against confirmation of appointees to the high court would quickly become a thing of the past.”
Envisioning Hillary Clinton in the White House and Democrats controlling the Senate, Reid warned that if a Senate Republican minority blocked her Supreme Court nominee, he is confident the party won’t hesitate to change the filibuster rules again "
Only 42 % think that the Court is too conservative is a bit strange because the Court is obviously way more conservative than the average American .
At least it’s a lot more diverse than ever - remember that it was seven white men that originally ruled on Roe v. Wade in 1973 and a black man and a woman helped overturn it.
There is a lot of us that have been saying way too much power has been given to the SC as well as the executive branch. Neuter both of them and congress will have to actually work together to get anything done.
I would note that the federal judiciary has life tenure PRECISELY so they are not mindful of public opinion, which should be 100% irrelevant to their deliberations or decisions.
While some of what went on during the Warren Court years was productive, at the same time, some of it needs to be rolled back.
Not with a sledgehammer, mind you, but in a nuanced way.
There are a couple of things that I would take the sledgehammer to, particularly the doctrine of “evolving standards of decency” something that should only be considered by the legislature, not the judiciary. It is arrogancy in its highest form for the unelected judiciary to impose their notion of what “decency” is. That job belongs to ELECTED legislators.
I don’t think the power of the SC or the Executive has anything to do with the dysfunction n Congress. That’s more because of the 24/7 media. It was easier to get away with compromise when there were less cameras rolling all the time and the news was more delayed.