- Joined
- May 25, 2018
- Messages
- 7,098
- Reaction score
- 4,780
- Location
- Lebanon Oregon
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Just thinking out loud here. What if we just admitted that SCOTUS was really just another political and partisan institution. We can't stop it and shaking our fists does not seem to work terribly well. Well in that case, then what we need is a lot more transparency. We should see how that sausage gets made so we can add our voices, can work to influence the result. . What if instead of secrecy around those early drafts, that were circulated for signatures, they were posted on a website and the newer suggested language was also signed and dated by each justice suggesting change . Now it works more like proposed amendments to a bill sitting in committee. And those are not particularly secret affairs. They happen in open committee hearings with up and down votes which are tallied and recorded for posterity. Why not have 'work sessions' and public comment sessions both in public and a broader array of testimony than just the oral arguments by two sets of counsel? All those amicus briefs, that represent the opinions of some very heady views too. Why are they not sitting, waiting a turn to give very public testimony? Why not treat the justices as we would a congressional committee and demand more transparency, and more input all through that process, rather than having to stand outside after the decision and cry about our impotence.