CEO Weekly
No Result
View All Result
  • Business
  • News
    Coach Anthony Helping Boxers Reach their Full Potential and Become Successful

    Coach Anthony Helping Boxers Reach their Full Potential and Become Successful

    How Does Insurance Work After A Fire

    How Does Insurance Work After A Fire

    U.S. authorities remove Covid testing requirement for travelers

    U.S. authorities remove Covid testing requirement for travelers

    National parks, public lands subject to ban on single-use plastic products, Interior Department says

    National parks, public lands subject to ban on single-use plastic products, Interior Department says

    As sea level rises, coastal communities will be forced to relocate, says U.K. Environment Agency

    As sea level rises, coastal communities will be forced to relocate, says U.K. Environment Agency

  • Politics
    Fed Governor willing to increase rates above ‘neutral’ level to curb inflation

    Fed Governor willing to increase rates above ‘neutral’ level to curb inflation

    ‘Tonight, I ask the nation to pray for them,’ Biden sympathizes with victims’ families, call for stricter gun laws

    ‘Tonight, I ask the nation to pray for them,’ Biden sympathizes with victims’ families, call for stricter gun laws

    Deportation Plan for Asylum Seekers Delayed

    UK’s Deportation Plan for Asylum Seekers Delayed

    Threatening the Lives of Election Officials, a Texan Man is Charged

    Threatening the Lives of Election Officials, a Texan Man is Charged

    Biden’s Vaccine Mandate for Federal Employees is Rejected by a Federal Court

    Biden’s Vaccine Mandate for Federal Employees is Rejected by a Federal Court

  • Leadership
    Emotional Intelligence is the Secret to Leadership in Times of Crisis

    Emotional Intelligence is the Secret to Leadership in Times of Crisis

    Prince William

    Prince William called on citizens to ‘preserve and protect the planet’

    Team Made Real Estate Proves that Teamwork Does Make the Dream Work

    Team Made Real Estate Proves that Teamwork Does Make the Dream Work

    Morgan Stanley CEO Wants Employees Back by Labor Day

    Morgan Stanley CEO Wants Employees Back by Labor Day

    NBA Champion Horace Grant & City Council Candidate Prince Rav Yisrael Pledge  $10,000 to Sparta Charities

    NBA Champion Horace Grant & City Council Candidate Prince Rav Yisrael Pledge $10,000 to Sparta Charities

  • Entertainment
    Art by Francesco Francavilla

    The Witches of Riverdale May See Hints of the Comic Series Afterlife with Archie

    Keith Ross Nelson Entertaining Audiences Globally with His Unique Comedy Style

    Keith Ross Nelson Entertaining Audiences Globally with His Unique Comedy Style

    Keith Ross Nelson Shares His Journey as a Comedian and Actor and How Perseverance Preserved Him

    Keith Ross Nelson Shares His Journey as a Comedian and Actor and How Perseverance Preserved Him

    Dwayne Johnson will star in new DC film, ‘Black Adam’

    Dwayne Johnson will star in new DC film, ‘Black Adam’

    Johnny Depp expresses thanks on TikTok

    Depp expresses thanks on TikTok, to ‘move on’ following trial

  • Lifestyle
    Dr. Gordon Andan Stands Out in the Industry through His Skills and Reputation

    Dr. Gordon Andan Stands Out in the Industry through His Skills and Reputation

    Versace and Cher collaborate for Pride Month, calls project ‘Chersace’

    Versace and Cher collaborate for Pride Month, calls project ‘Chersace’

    Football star Jude Bellingham shares his experiences with racism

    Football star Jude Bellingham shares his experiences with racism

    At-Home Covid Tests: What is it and How to Use it?

    At-Home Covid Tests: What is it and How to Use it?

    Japan’s Anti-Procrastination Cafe

    Japan’s Anti-Procrastination Cafe Wants to Help Writers Catch Deadlines

  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
CEO Weekly
No Result
View All Result
Home News

Mending the Broken Pieces in Supreme Court

Olivia Washington by Olivia Washington
January 20, 2022
in News
Mending the Broken Pieces in Supreme Court
Share on Facebook

The Supreme Court should act as a counterbalance to the will of the majority. But this may require constraints. Here are six ways to reform the courts and one argument that we shouldn’t change anything.

In the 1803 case of Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court has taken for itself the power to determine the constitution’s meaning. Since then, federal courts have used judicial review selectively as a counterweight to majority rule.

The court has reached historic highs by taking sides with minorities who have no political power, especially in expanding civil rights. The typical example is the 1954 unanimous decision calling for an end to legally compulsory school segregation in Brown v. Board of Education – a ruling adopted by every recent court candidate across the ideological spectrum.

But historically, the court has also gone off course by taking significant action against majoritarian governments – and has been knocked down by the elected branches. In the aftermath of the civil war, Congress passed a law requiring southern states to rejoin the Union, allowing black people and white people to vote to ratify the 14th Amendment, which promised equal rights.

When this pillar of reconstruction was challenged in the Ex Parte McCardle case, Congress feared the Supreme Court would bring it down. So he stripped the court’s jurisdiction over reconstruction and brought the number of judges to nine. 

At the turn of the 20th century, a period known as the Lochner era, the court discredited itself by placing companies’ interests above those of employees, bypassing laws regulating the workplace. And during the Great Depression, when the Supreme Court blocked critical parts of the New Deal, the justices found themselves in a standoff with President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He asked Congress to raise the number of judges to 15.

But it wasn’t the President or Congress who blinked first. A conservative judge changed positions in 1937 to enforce another New Deal law, followed by a second that quickly announced his retirement.

In the decades following that confrontation, some liberals and conservatives have argued that the court exercised judicial modesty, or humility, by mainly refraining from canceling the selected departments’ work. But once an ideological bloc in the court has a majority, its members (and their supporters) tend to forgo moderation in favor of exercising its power.

Liberals celebrated a winning streak during Warren’s court days in the 1960s and 1970s. Into the current decade, they have appealed to the court to protect civil rights and prevent the establishment of religion, even if this was not following public opinion.

Now they are waking up to the downside of judicial supremacy — the opposite of restraint – in the hands of a conservative majority expanding to six. One of the most telling moments of Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing was her refusal to say whether she believed Medicare – the famous and long-established health insurance plan – was legal.

Democrats have highlighted the threat Judge Barrett could pose to another increasingly popular healthcare law, the Affordable Care Act. They know that if the Conservative judges cancel it in a trial due to start on November 10, they risk going overboard with their hand just as the conservative majority did in the 1930s.

The consequences go far beyond the A.C.A. An encouraging conservative court can again push the law forward to favor the power of corporations – over consumers, over employees, and the sheer will of people.

Do the Liberals sound the alarm now because they fear the impending results, not the judicial overrun principle? In part, yes, but that’s not the whole story.

There is also structural criticism of the role of the Supreme Court. The judges may lag slightly behind the chosen branches. They can, and often should be the protectors of minorities that the majority can trample (including religious groups, current conservatives). But if the court takes the country too far from the elected wards, the constitution gives Congress the power to keep the court in check.

The most pressing question now is whether the Conservative majority will decide on voting, enumeration, redistribution, and other foundations of fair and free elections that threaten the majority nature of American democracy itself. If conservative judges take these steps, they will bolster the Republican Party’s power that has given them their seats, just as an increasingly multiracial electorate is moving away from the current Republican coalition.

Previous Post

Otaku Origins Is Ready to Dominate the Metaverse With Their Anime-Inspired NFT Project

Next Post

COVID Drastically Resulted to Exacerbate Insufficiency of Health Workers

Olivia Washington

Olivia Washington

Olivia is a pro-life and anti-fake news advocate. She campaigns her advocacy on social media and on her website. She writes about the importance of authentic news writing, politics and leadership.

Next Post
COVID Drastically Resulted to Exacerbate Insufficiency of Health Workers

COVID Drastically Resulted to Exacerbate Insufficiency of Health Workers

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent News

Dr. Gordon Andan Stands Out in the Industry through His Skills and Reputation

Dr. Gordon Andan Stands Out in the Industry through His Skills and Reputation

July 4, 2022
Coach Anthony Helping Boxers Reach their Full Potential and Become Successful

Coach Anthony Helping Boxers Reach their Full Potential and Become Successful

July 4, 2022
Trusted Credit Repair on Achieving Growth and Enabling Success

Trusted Credit Repair on Achieving Growth and Enabling Success

July 4, 2022
How Does Insurance Work After A Fire

How Does Insurance Work After A Fire

July 4, 2022
Chris Sheng Revolutionizes the B2B Sales and Marketing Landscape by Removing the Need for Paid Advertising

Chris Sheng Revolutionizes the B2B Sales and Marketing Landscape by Removing the Need for Paid Advertising

July 1, 2022
‘Super Mentors’ by Eric Koester Argues That We Must Aim Higher for Mentors. But How?

‘Super Mentors’ by Eric Koester Argues That We Must Aim Higher for Mentors. But How?

July 1, 2022
Top 10 Self-Made Men and Women

Top 10 Self-Made Men and Women

July 1, 2022
Top Success Strategist Stacey O’Byrne on Utilizing Coaching to Help People Thrive and Uplevel

Top Success Strategist Stacey O’Byrne on Utilizing Coaching to Help People Thrive and Uplevel

June 30, 2022
Insight Memphis Media: The Remarkable Enterprise That Promotes Filmmaking and Champions Community Building

Insight Memphis Media: The Remarkable Enterprise That Promotes Filmmaking and Champions Community Building

June 30, 2022
Gareth Bale seals Real Madrid's victory against Liverpool in the 2017-2018 Champions League Final

Five-Time Champions League Winner Gareth Bale Joins Los Angeles FC

June 30, 2022
Art by Francesco Francavilla

The Witches of Riverdale May See Hints of the Comic Series Afterlife with Archie

June 30, 2022

The Supreme Court should act as a counterbalance to the will of the majority. But this may require constraints. Here are six ways to reform the courts and one argument that we shouldn't change anything.

In the 1803 case of Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court has taken for itself the power to determine the constitution's meaning. Since then, federal courts have used judicial review selectively as a counterweight to majority rule.

The court has reached historic highs by taking sides with minorities who have no political power, especially in expanding civil rights. The typical example is the 1954 unanimous decision calling for an end to legally compulsory school segregation in Brown v. Board of Education - a ruling adopted by every recent court candidate across the ideological spectrum.

But historically, the court has also gone off course by taking significant action against majoritarian governments - and has been knocked down by the elected branches. In the aftermath of the civil war, Congress passed a law requiring southern states to rejoin the Union, allowing black people and white people to vote to ratify the 14th Amendment, which promised equal rights.

When this pillar of reconstruction was challenged in the Ex Parte McCardle case, Congress feared the Supreme Court would bring it down. So he stripped the court's jurisdiction over reconstruction and brought the number of judges to nine. 

At the turn of the 20th century, a period known as the Lochner era, the court discredited itself by placing companies' interests above those of employees, bypassing laws regulating the workplace. And during the Great Depression, when the Supreme Court blocked critical parts of the New Deal, the justices found themselves in a standoff with President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He asked Congress to raise the number of judges to 15.

But it wasn't the President or Congress who blinked first. A conservative judge changed positions in 1937 to enforce another New Deal law, followed by a second that quickly announced his retirement.

In the decades following that confrontation, some liberals and conservatives have argued that the court exercised judicial modesty, or humility, by mainly refraining from canceling the selected departments' work. But once an ideological bloc in the court has a majority, its members (and their supporters) tend to forgo moderation in favor of exercising its power.

Liberals celebrated a winning streak during Warren's court days in the 1960s and 1970s. Into the current decade, they have appealed to the court to protect civil rights and prevent the establishment of religion, even if this was not following public opinion.

Now they are waking up to the downside of judicial supremacy — the opposite of restraint - in the hands of a conservative majority expanding to six. One of the most telling moments of Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation hearing was her refusal to say whether she believed Medicare - the famous and long-established health insurance plan - was legal.

Democrats have highlighted the threat Judge Barrett could pose to another increasingly popular healthcare law, the Affordable Care Act. They know that if the Conservative judges cancel it in a trial due to start on November 10, they risk going overboard with their hand just as the conservative majority did in the 1930s.

The consequences go far beyond the A.C.A. An encouraging conservative court can again push the law forward to favor the power of corporations - over consumers, over employees, and the sheer will of people.

Do the Liberals sound the alarm now because they fear the impending results, not the judicial overrun principle? In part, yes, but that's not the whole story.

There is also structural criticism of the role of the Supreme Court. The judges may lag slightly behind the chosen branches. They can, and often should be the protectors of minorities that the majority can trample (including religious groups, current conservatives). But if the court takes the country too far from the elected wards, the constitution gives Congress the power to keep the court in check.

The most pressing question now is whether the Conservative majority will decide on voting, enumeration, redistribution, and other foundations of fair and free elections that threaten the majority nature of American democracy itself. If conservative judges take these steps, they will bolster the Republican Party's power that has given them their seats, just as an increasingly multiracial electorate is moving away from the current Republican coalition.

No Result
View All Result
  • Business
  • News
  • Politics
  • Leadership
  • Entertainment
  • Lifestyle
  • Contact Us

© 2022 CEO Weekly. All Rights Reserved

CEO Weekly

Follow us

© 2022 CEO Weekly. All Rights Reserved

A News Anchored Network Publication

Terms and Conditions
Privacy Policy
CEO Weekly

© 2021 CEO Weekly. All Rights Reserved

A News Anchored Network Publication

Terms and Conditions
Privacy Policy