The Justices are taking the position that it is more important to protect the court from controversy than to protect the constitution from being rendered irrelevant. In taking this position they are making themselves irrelevant. What good is it to have a decider who refuses to decide?
The Justices are taking the position that it is more important to protect the court from controversy than to protect the constitution from being rendered irrelevant. In taking this position they are making themselves irrelevant. What good is it to have a decider who refuses to decide?
Excellent point. I guess they would rather see the insurrection act activated.
Excellent point. I guess they would rather see the insurrection act activated.
Excellent point. Why have a high court if they consistently avoid cases that come with controversy. They have made themselves irrelevant by their own inaction.
Excellent point. Why have a high court if they consistently avoid cases that come with controversy. They have made themselves irrelevant by their own inaction.
(post is archived)