That SCOTUS believes 1 man can effectively run the largest, most important corporation on the planet without independent inputs and controls is absurd.
That they believe the current occupant should be the test pilot for this maiden flight is Greek level tragedy.
I don't think the Supreme Court cares whether the person in charge runs the country well, so long as he runs it into the ground. Which is much easier to do when the president is unrestrained.
Appreciate your laying out the prognosis. Early constraints in the immigration realm might point another way -- but these Federalist boys have been working for a long time to get us a monarchy.
What a bunch of muppets. Whenever the Supreme Court engages in these cut-outs, whether non-precedential (sorry, what) cases like Bush v. Gore, a sunset provision on affirmative action, or “the Federal Reserve is a snowflake, actually,” it is just manifest policy-making.
I’m under no illusion that judges are the platonic ideal of a neutral arbiter, but there is a lot of avoidable low-hanging fruit, and this style of bench legislation is one of them.
Finally, even when I went through my short Federalist Society phase, I couldn’t understand the appeal of the unitary executive theory to any American. I’m over-simplifying, but not by much, when I say it always sounded like “a king but, you know, different.”
That SCOTUS believes 1 man can effectively run the largest, most important corporation on the planet without independent inputs and controls is absurd.
That they believe the current occupant should be the test pilot for this maiden flight is Greek level tragedy.
I don't think the Supreme Court cares whether the person in charge runs the country well, so long as he runs it into the ground. Which is much easier to do when the president is unrestrained.
Maybe their goal isn't national destruction. Maybe SCOTUS is willing to risk that destruction to achieve their goal.
Appreciate your laying out the prognosis. Early constraints in the immigration realm might point another way -- but these Federalist boys have been working for a long time to get us a monarchy.
What a bunch of muppets. Whenever the Supreme Court engages in these cut-outs, whether non-precedential (sorry, what) cases like Bush v. Gore, a sunset provision on affirmative action, or “the Federal Reserve is a snowflake, actually,” it is just manifest policy-making.
I’m under no illusion that judges are the platonic ideal of a neutral arbiter, but there is a lot of avoidable low-hanging fruit, and this style of bench legislation is one of them.
Finally, even when I went through my short Federalist Society phase, I couldn’t understand the appeal of the unitary executive theory to any American. I’m over-simplifying, but not by much, when I say it always sounded like “a king but, you know, different.”