They could rule that law unconstitutional and void it, though.
Judges don’t pass law at all. At must jurisprudence in the absence of law. Laws are the realm of the legislative.
The legislative could pass a law limiting supreme court term to 16 years tomorrow of they wanted.
bizarroland@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
acockworkorange@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
I was about to say that they’d have to base that on the constitution but… gestures broadly… Yeah, the current court would have to be dismantled first.
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
web.archive.org/…/qualified-immunity-supreme-cour…
And if the 1982 SCOTUS had been given the full text of the relevant law, then QI would have never happened. It is expressly illegal according to the full text of Section 1983
radix@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Judges don’t pass laws, but they can create plenty of loopholes out of thin air. Qualified Immunity doesn’t exist in any statute (to my knowledge), but it is a de facto legal standard, for one example.
acockworkorange@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
Because there isn’t a law about it. What we need is a legislative that actually does their fucking job.
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
There is a law about it.
web.archive.org/…/qualified-immunity-supreme-cour…
And if the 1982 SCOTUS had been given the full text of the relevant law, then QI would have never happened. It is expressly illegal according to the full text of Section 1983
gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Well… yes and no. Judges can and do blatantly ignore law and impartiality. To wit: Judge Cannon, who successfully completely stymied any meaningful prosecution of orangeboi, in a series of legal decisions that were overtly partisan and biased.
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
web.archive.org/…/qualified-immunity-supreme-cour…
And if the 1982 SCOTUS had been given the full text of the relevant law, then QI would have never happened. It is expressly illegal according to the full text of Section 1983