I don't agree with the philosophy of Constitutional "interpretation" RBG represented. I think it should be interpreted strictly according to an honest effort in interpret the language along with an equally honest effort to proceed according to how that language was generally understood when it was ratified. I think the Court doing anything else is the Court making law. I have never agreed with the idea that it is "necessary" for the Court to effectively change the Constitution to evolve with the times. There is a mechanism in the Constitution to provide for changing it. That mechanism requires social consensus for change and I think that is the way it should be. I do not think the effect of the Constitution should be changed by a majority vote among 9 unelected, life term officials.89Hen wrote: ↑Sat Sep 19, 2020 4:18 pmYou sure hope so. Everyone is fawning over the legacy of RBG. She was a firm believer in the SCOTUS rewriting the Constitution.JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Sat Sep 19, 2020 12:36 pm
The Democrats are eventually going to assume complete control. The handwriting is on the wall. If it doesn't happen this year it is still going to happen relatively soon in historical context. And when they do they are not going to tolerate a "conservative" Supreme Court. They will do what's necessary to eliminate that. Have your fun while you can.
All that said: Whether I hope the Democrats come to dominate or not does not matter. As we've discussed many times, unless something changes fundamentally with voting among demographic groups, the shrinking proportion of the population of the population composed of non-hispanic whites means eventual doom for the Republican Party. It's always possible something could change. But exit polling back to 1976 shows no indication that such should be expected.
The current Republican Party is the Party of relatively uneducated, older White People. It's a dying brand even if its adherence don't realize that yet.