General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Thom Hartmann spanked a couple of DU'ers today on his show - [View all]backscatter712
(26,355 posts)Yes, I know, judicial review is not in the Constitution. It came about by historical accident as a result of Marbury v. Madison.
(TRIVIA: The Supreme Court did not exercise its powers of judicial review again until the Dred Scott decision decades later, which was probably the absolute worst Supreme Court decision in United States history.)
Nevertheless, I think that judicial review is necessary given the behavior patterns of the President and Congress over history. They pass atrocious legislation, violate peoples' rights, and do disgusting things all the time. They need a check and balance to ensure they don't pass unconstitutional legislation.
I don't think the people throwing out bad legislators and Presidents for giving us bad legislation is good enough. One of the things Congress has done over the years, as has the President, is enacting various measures to deny people the right to vote. If you pass something that pisses a large amount of the people off, you can counter the backlash by making it so your opponents can't vote you out.
That's the path to tyranny.
So regardless of historical accident, I think that judicial review is necessary, and has done some very positive things, like Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade, Romer v. Evans (which overturned a state constitutional amendment passed by the people, because it violated the rights of the GLBT community - even the people themselves need checks and balances.)
So I suggest that the SCOTUS keep judicial review, but they need a check. What would you suggest, Thom?
I'd suggest retention elections, as is done at the state level for many states. The President nominates a SCOTUS justice, the Senate confirms, and every eight years or so, the people vote to retain or remove him. Make too many bad/partisan decisions, and you're thrown out!
The one catch is that Citizens United would also have to be overturned, to limit the ability of special interests, 527s, super-PACs and corporate/billionaire elites to manipulate voters and screw with elections.
That's one possible change to make. What would you suggest?