this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
84 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10174 readers
86 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

NYT gift article expires in 30 days.

https://archive.ph/ld8eq

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Taako_Tuesday@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When you've got an outdated document as the backbone of your whole legal system, you kinda have to re-re-interpret everything, no matter what. Originalists tend to be pretty conservative, it's just a method of thinking that allows conservative lawyers/judges/legal people to slap some legitimacy onto their interpretations. It's an alternative to the modern (centrist) interpretation of law in the US, which has in recent years allowed for things like gay marriage. However the flavor of conservatism is very "traditional" compared to the modern alt-right, meaning they are also often anti-trump.

[–] upstream@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Imagine if we made new laws that evolved with the time and retired old laws that are clearly anachronistic?

If instead of interpreting and discussing unclear text the legislators just said “we believe this is wrong, and thus - now we change it”.

[–] PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's the job of Congress.

But the Supreme Court can also down those laws too. That was what conservatives attempted with the Affordable Care Act .

[–] upstream@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sorry if I was unclear; I was trying to say “imagine if you had a system that worked” 🫣

And I don’t mean that in any negative way, other than to say that the current system is visibly broken.

[–] Taako_Tuesday@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

That is technically what the amendments are, but it's so much harder to push an amendment through congress than it is to just argue that the constitution already agrees with what you want to happen