This ain't it chief.
If gutting checks and balances means more successful policymaking for 2 years I'd rather go without them.
It is not just 2 years though. This kind of aggressive approach essentially ties the SC to the political parties which both increases the number of years the Ds control the courts than the status quo, also makes the party controlling the SC pay a political price when SC makes an unpopular decision. I know Republicans won't like it, this post is not for them. It provides a way for the Ds to enact and maintain policy and completely politicizing the courts and making them an extension of the political parties is key to that objective.
Unfortunately, that has already happened.
All that's left is trying to find the best way to move forward from the smoking ruins.
