Re:Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
by mcbrit on Thursday June 30, 2022 @02:30PM
(#31936551)
It is well known that there are competing, consistent theories on how to interpret the Constitution.
If we assume that each Justice subscribes to a consistent theory on how to interpret the Constitution, you omit a discussion (much less a proof) that at least one Justice's theory is 'partisan', that the theory being partisan would be bad, or to make a foundational move, that a theory that is nonpartisan exists. I think there are interesting discussions to be had on all of those topics.
I think your post is too strongly worded, being a triple attack on the hn community, the Supreme Court, and the state of American politics.
If we assume that each Justice subscribes to a consistent theory on how to interpret the Constitution, you omit a discussion (much less a proof) that at least one Justice's theory is 'partisan', that the theory being partisan would be bad, or to make a foundational move, that a theory that is nonpartisan exists. I think there are interesting discussions to be had on all of those topics.
I think your post is too strongly worded, being a triple attack on the hn community, the Supreme Court, and the state of American politics.