Message from @Pyro
Discord ID: 514314908385673246
They have the authority to rule on the people in Congress
Not on the laws that were pased
why not the president?
that seems like it kinda defeats the purpose of the judicial branch
^
surely they meant for the thing to exist
and serve some purpose
like maybe the purpose they said it was for
Yeah and I said it earlier
May I ask what you both want to happen in this presidency
giving their opinion on questions of controversy
Decide on a case as an unbiased 3rd party
in which the U.S. is party
Trump 2020?
which would include something you could call judicial review
a lot of this requires two competing equally strong political parties so it's not like it's perfect
Not create laws by making shit unconstitutional because they seem it so
Triggering the Libs.
as they did, merely 15 years after the constitution was ratified
but what else is there?
nobody then, and virtually nobody now, found it odd that you would ask the supreme court questions about the meaning of the constitution
You mean 9 unelected officials did as a power grab
you say unelected
Not the government as a whole
Not the people either
but when pressed, you said you preferred that they were unelected
so why say unelected
when _even you_ think it's better than the alternative?
the supreme court makes a decision, and that is enforced by the political party not in the matter and enforced via threats of not being elected into office
why would you want unelected officials determining your laws?
I'm saying I dislike judicial review
Not the scotus
well, that's fine
it is constitutional
It isnt
Wait...isn't the military *unelected*?
it is well within the role described in article III
It's not written anywhere in there
Specifically