Israel - a lot going on

the scary reality is that our system of checks and balances are broken. Trump was clearly guilty in both impeachment hearings and yet the truth did not matter. When the executive branch cannot be successfully impeached, our system is just as broken as Israel's seems to be approaching. Of the many terrible things that man brought us is the partisan politics that overrules common sense and facts in evidence. maybe it had been there and he just brough it out.

 

Im definitely worrying about it too. Especially at the state level, where most states now have governors and both houses controlled by the same party, in addition to many which have changed the face of their supreme courts. The federal level is still a bit more protected, but those protections are definitely and sadly waning.

 

The US is self-destructing.

 

Reminds me of a quote from Abraham Lincoln:

“If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher.”

 

Moodys threatens their credit rating.

Moody's warns Israel faces 'significant risk' of political and social tensions that will harm its economy, security | CNN Business

 

Interesting article. Thanks. Israel is facing the same issue we face: how much power should a “supreme” court have. We claim our SCOTUS is the better alternative because we have a constitution and lifetime appointments. I’d suggest that’s largely a fiction, because whether it was the Warren court or the Roberts court, it seems clear to me that personal philosophies unavoidably influence the Justices’ interpretation of our Constitution. For example, I supported the conclusion in Roe vs. Wade, but thought the reasoning tortured the Constitution. Many will disagree.

So, I understand the prime minister’s concerns. The problem is, I don’t know a solution for Israel, just as I don’t for our SCOTUS. We just have to live with the different philosophies of the various Justices. One thing is for sure: we aren’t allowed to vote them out even when the majority of Americans don’t agree with a decision.

 

I guess the reason for lifetime appointment is so that justices don’t make rulings based upon whether or not it will help their reelection. Justices might be hesitant to make a correct interpretation of the law if it would mean they would be voted out of office.

I don’t know how it is in other states, but in Ohio we elect the supreme court justices. Their party affiliation is not listed on the ballot. However, things that come in the mail from either party do promote the justices from their side.

You allude to an interesting situation. Should we be able to vote out justices if we don’t like their rulings? That eventually could be lead to governance by social media: voting likes and dislikes to determine law.

 

I totally agree wi

i’m not saying they shouldn’t, but are you suggesting SCOTUS should decide cases based upon public opinion?

 

I agree. SCOTUS isn’t like a Circuit Court judge. Its decisions in major cases set policy. It’s more than interpreting the Constitution, though that hallowed document should be deferred to at least where it confers rights. Recognizing that interpretations vary, the Justices should look to public opinion, though, as I write this, I realize it’s a slippery slope. For example, how are they to determine it? Still, these should be educated, experienced and wise men and women able to know what is in the country’s best interests. Those men were absent in the recent abortion decision.
BTW, I thought Citizens United was also one of the worst decision ever. Surely the majority knew what it’s decision would unleash! (Perhaps they did and wanted the wealthy elite to have more influence!)