[Magdalen] Supreme Court

[Jim Guthrie]

From: Roger Stokes

>I recognize that the US Supreme Court is charged, inter alia, with the 
>interpretation of the Constitution. That means it needs to be

So are most courts in the U.S. But the cases that make the Supreme Court tend to 
be those that going up the appeals ladder result in different interpretations 
that then need to be resolved so that people have equal protection throughout 
the nation.

>independent of the legislature amd the executive branches of government. 
>However in recent judgements, notably as regards same-sex marriage, it has 
>shown that it is responsive to "sensus populi" rather than being strictly bound 
>by prior decisions of that Court.

You've been watching Fox News even in England?  <g>

There were a number of different cases in Circuit Courts, but in most (bot not 
all) cases, the judge either could not see the argument of taint-same sex 
marriage side because they could not demonstrate harm to themselves, and in 
addition, even standing. The antis took to appeals -- and the Appeals Courts 
upheld the Circuit Court Decisions. But the way it works is that even one case 
brought to the Appeals Court results in a decision that covers all state in the 
Appeals Court Jurisdiction.

One Appeals Court -- in New Orleans,with judges appointed from conservative 
southern states found differently than all the other appeals courts.

That set the state for the Supreme Court to decide the case either in agreement 
with the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans -- or every one of the other appeals 
courts that ruled in favor of same sex marriage.

I think it's a total misrepresentation to say the court follows the polls. 
Polls show that most Americans oppose Obamacare too -- but that didn’t stop a 
6-3 decision in favor of it. Most people object to buying elections, but the 
Supreme Court ruled otherwise in Citizens United.

In short, in case after case, the Supreme Court could care less about public 
opinion. I don’t think you can single out Burwell as an outlier where they 
suddenly  looked at the polls.

>said, where is it stated that Supreme Court Justices hold office until death or 
>resignation?  Is this appropriate or should there be provision for forced 
>retirement on the basis of time served, age or inability to carry out the 
>funbctions of being a Justoce?

I think it might behoove you to read up on President Roosevelt's effort to "pack 
the court" in the 1930s for more on the history in the United States.

Cheers,
Jim