BLUE
Login
Profile banner
PR
Paul Rosenberg
@paulrosenberg.bsky.social
Words. More to come.
1.2k followers594 following9.9k posts
PRpaulrosenberg.bsky.social

The second, more progressive frame has gotten relatively scant attention. @ryandoerfler.bsky.social gave two reasons it should be taken more seriously. First, that democracy is valuable in itself: 17/28

At least the “legitimization” frame, the first one mentioned above, is being discussed, although it’s still not widely embraced among the punditocracy. That second, more progressive frame has gotten less attention, and I asked Doerfler why it deserves to be taken more seriously. The first reason, he said, is that democracy is valuable in itself, and that we as a people should be offended by the idea of our nation’s most important decisions being effectively removed from the political realm. Whatever one’s views on any of the issues I mention, Supreme Court justices have no legitimate claim, morally, epistemically or legally, to having any say, let alone the final say, on such things.
1
PRpaulrosenberg.bsky.social

Second, for progressives specifically, SCOTUS is historically reactionary, as laid out above: 18/28

Second, for progressives specifically, the Supreme Court is not just today but historically a reactionary institution. The Supreme Court’s track record concerning federal legislation especially is abominable, from Dred Scott to Hammer v. Dagenhart to Citizens United. So not only does the Supreme Court have no legitimate claim to the decisions it makes, but the decisions it makes have systematically harmed our society’s most vulnerable, least affluent populations.
1
Profile banner
PR
Paul Rosenberg
@paulrosenberg.bsky.social
Words. More to come.
1.2k followers594 following9.9k posts
HomePopularExplore