You're on SCOTUS: What is you're guiding philosophy?

[KaiserDave]

Same as above! You've been appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate after being found as qualified and probably politically reliable as well. What legal philosophy do you bring to the bench?


I'll post mine soon!

[KaiserDave]

I think that the Constitution is an outdated piece of junk, so I would just do what I think is best for the nation

What's the point of laws then if an unelected judge can just do whatever they want?

I mean...you of course can rule however you like but I view it as wrong to not ground it in some legal basis, even if it's not originalist (and I am not one).

[KaiserDave]

I think that the Constitution is an outdated piece of junk, so I would just do what I think is best for the nation

What's the point of laws then if an unelected judge can just do whatever they want?

I mean...you of course can rule however you like but I view it as wrong to not ground it in some legal basis, even if it's not originalist (and I am not one).

The Constitution should have been rewritten long ago, and the only reason why it hasn’t is because of the ridiculous requirements for amending the Constitution and the large portion of rubes in this country who buy into the right wing narrative that the Constitution is some sort of God-given document written by men wiser than anyone alive. Besides, Republican hacks like Alito and Thomas pretty much ignore the Constitution whenever it’s convenient to them anyways

So then you say...skip democracy and just have judges do whatever they want?

[KaiserDave]

I think that the Constitution is an outdated piece of junk, so I would just do what I think is best for the nation

What's the point of laws then if an unelected judge can just do whatever they want?

I mean...you of course can rule however you like but I view it as wrong to not ground it in some legal basis, even if it's not originalist (and I am not one).

The Constitution should have been rewritten long ago, and the only reason why it hasn’t is because of the ridiculous requirements for amending the Constitution and the large portion of rubes in this country who buy into the right wing narrative that the Constitution is some sort of God-given document written by men wiser than anyone alive. Besides, Republican hacks like Alito and Thomas pretty much ignore the Constitution whenever it’s convenient to them anyways

So then you say...skip democracy and just have judges do whatever they want?

Since when are Justices democratically elected? They’re already allowed to do whatever they want.

You said that you would do whatever you wanted. So naturally that is fairly undemocratic. Like...very much so.

[KaiserDave]

Whatever.

Mine would be similar to Nathan's. Based in textualism (NOT originalism of any kind), but entirely pragmatic, and with an eye to both future precedent and how the law would be enforced. I do not consider myself a modernist, or a supporter of the living constitution theory, but the decisions I would make would probably come down on the liberal side, though not too liberal.

I would not bring original intent of any kind into my decisions.

I also view the professionalism, dignity, and apoliticism of the court as very important.

A unique mix of Sotomayor, Breyer, Roberts, and Gorsuch.

[KaiserDave]

X are bad. Therefore I must be like x. For.....reasons.

[KaiserDave]

X are bad. Therefore I must be like x. For.....reasons.

I never said anything was bad

You implied that given that judicial hacks exist, you would also act as a judicial hack for your side

So you don’t think said hackery is bad? I respectfully disagree

[KaiserDave]

X are bad. Therefore I must be like x. For.....reasons.

I never said anything was bad

You implied that given that judicial hacks exist, you would also act as a judicial hack for your side

So you don’t think said hackery is bad? I respectfully disagree

Why would it be? It's the correct way to rule

No, not really