Is it sad that more people could name a US supreme court case than one by their own highest court?

[dead0man]

I don’t think it’s sad (at least for us). I’m very happy to live in a country where the laws are determined democratically rather than by 9 unelected political activists masquerading as judges.

that's exactly what the Supreme Court did when they over turned Roe v Wade.

[CumbrianLefty]

I don’t think it’s sad (at least for us). I’m very happy to live in a country where the laws are determined democratically rather than by 9 unelected political activists masquerading as judges.

that's exactly what the Supreme Court did when they over turned Roe v Wade.

Uh, yeah OK.

[dead0man]

I don’t think it’s sad (at least for us). I’m very happy to live in a country where the laws are determined democratically rather than by 9 unelected political activists masquerading as judges.

that's exactly what the Supreme Court did when they over turned Roe v Wade.

Uh, yeah OK.

that sounds sarcastic, what did I say that was wrong?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I don’t think it’s sad (at least for us). I’m very happy to live in a country where the laws are determined democratically rather than by 9 unelected political activists masquerading as judges.

that's exactly what the Supreme Court did when they over turned Roe v Wade.

Uh, yeah OK.

I mean, it was. This sudden left/liberal reaction against “unelected bureaucrats” reminds me more than anything of the conservative reaction to Obergefell than anything else. Roe v. Wade was antidemocratic  and took decisions about abortion out of the hands of state legislators. That was good. They shouldn’t be making those decisions for other people.

[parochial boy]

Dunno, on the whole I'm glad I live in a country where political decisions are made democratically. Not by something as downright frightening and an ideologically aligned justice system.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Dunno, on the whole I'm glad I live in a country where political decisions are made democratically. Not by something as downright frightening and an ideologically aligned justice system.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Swiss_referendums

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

I don’t think it’s sad (at least for us). I’m very happy to live in a country where the laws are determined democratically rather than by 9 unelected political activists masquerading as judges.

that's exactly what the Supreme Court did when they over turned Roe v Wade.

Uh, yeah OK.

I mean, it was. This sudden left/liberal reaction against “unelected bureaucrats” reminds me more than anything of the conservative reaction to Obergefell than anything else. Roe v. Wade was antidemocratic  and took decisions about abortion out of the hands of state legislators. That was good. They shouldn’t be making those decisions for other people.

Yeah that's what get's me. The supreme court returned the descion, to legislatures here. It didn't mandate abortions are bad like a certain other supreme court so all it did was return america policy to the same way it works in the rest of the world.

[CumbrianLefty]

Yes, but the point is that *in practice* that means instant abortion bans across much of the US.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

Yes, but the point is that *in practice* that means instant abortion bans across much of the US.

Yes that's terrible but the fault lies in the people who voted for governments that promised to implement them. Given many of those states had referendums in abortion, the fault lies with the people of those states.

[Joseph Cao]

This is really three things though:

1) news media worldwide having an obsession with every twist and turn of American politics (anecdotally, a local paper in Malaysia covered the Dobbs ruling and it got more clicks than the ongoing soap opera that is the UMNO president graft trial)

2) thanks to that, outside of coverage of local court trials American court cases are basically the only things that penetrate the popular consciousness, and even a sustained effort like the Dobbs coverage will only get most people to learn the names "Roe v. Wade" for the first or second time and it will be forgotten in a few weeks as Battista has mentioned

3) as others pointed out, most High Court cases don't have the snappy names that America has, and while people can certainly tell you about the court ruling against Leung Kwok-hung or whoever they will invariably refer to it as "that court ruling against Long Hair", which doesn't count as naming.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Great post topic.

It's not sad. It's a strange kind of weirdness.

Even stranger in Australia.

Once the US has a movement with mass Protests, Australia follows suit.

Some type of Global Media News - Facebook - Instagram - Google phenomenon.

For example:

1. BLM - African Australian's are under no duress from the Police. BLM Protests anyway.

2. Abortion - is legal in Australia. Protests took place anyway.

Next will be automatic rifles.

Once there is a mass-mass shooting like Las Vegas or Otoya Island in the US and people say enough is enough (the day must be getting closer) then no doubt...Australian's will have a mass protest about AR-15's which are already banned here.

It's some type of online herd mentality. People just want to be seen to be talking about the issues in the media despite them being under no local effect from said issue.

It's because we get a lot of pre-packed news from the US.