7 comments

[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 23.3 ms ] thread
(headline, ext version) Supreme Court To Lower Courts: Ignore Actual Binding Precedent, Follow Our Unexplained Shadow Docket Vibes Instead
> The Supreme Court’s shadow docket has become a lawless mess. The justices are issuing extremely consequential rulings with either no explanation at all, or with barely a paragraph of reasoning.

This is status quo for Florida's district courts of appeal (its intermediate appellate courts).

I'll just note that this seems entirely predictable. So much so that I can't help but see it as purposeful. The federal court system itself only has about 25,000 employees. SCOTUS has 9 judges plus a couple dozen clerks and other assistants. Lower courts already do not have enough employees to contend with an executive branch made up of millions of individuals, especially when that executive is ordering its employees (seemingly) to just ignore or purposefully misinterpret laws, leading to an ever-increasing number of lawsuits. To further reduce the power of lower courts at this time (which this SCOTUS seems to do in almost every decision involving the executive) means even more cases for SCOTUS and even less time for arguments.

Conveniently, we have the shadow docket. A way to issue diktats without any arguments before the court and in many cases without any reasoning whatsoever.

And conveniently, lower courts can then interpret a lack of details from a shadow docket decision however they want. So that the executive can appeal yet again, to get another thumbs down from SCOTUS (without any explanation), and round and round we go. The executive gets to keep the plates spinning while it essentially does whatever it wants.

With this situation, why shouldn't we simply pack the courts? If SCOTUS is going to take more cases than it can handle and not provide any real guidance to lower courts, then clearly they need more employees.

> why shouldn't we simply pack the courts?

We need deeper reform.

I’m personally a fan of choosing by lot, from the appellate bench, a random slate of justices for each case. (That court of rotating judges would be the one in which “the judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested” [1].) You could do this entirely through legislation—nothing in the Constitution requires lifetime appointments to a permanent bench.

[1] https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-3/

The democrats are just not interested in being as opposed to this as they morally should because a large portion are bought biy the same capitalist forces that buy republicans.

Whats more likely are states to shift policies to ignoring the federal courts and localize.

The essential problem is the federal government is attacking the most fortified jurisdictions while choking their own support structures.

That doesnt mean theyll fail, the same way shitty policies dont prevent Taliban rule.

Thomas, Alito, even Roberts, and 2 of the 3 Trump appointees = they are acting as if conspiring WITH the Trump admin and a MAGA congress in a vast conspiracy you would never be foolish enough to believe was possible, were it not happening in real-time in front of our faces.

This lawless corrupt Supine Court is making it up as they go along, and then Alito and Roberts have the nerve to be outraged when their blatant corruption is pointed out. I wish they would be subject to that ancient Persian remedy for corrupt judges.

History will NOT look kindly upon how the Supreme Court of the USA gave a government employee the power of a king.

Lower court follows precedent.The law.High court follows The Enabling act.They don't need to explain.