Is there really a separation of powers in government?

Both the courts and congress are stronger than the judiciary, by a decent margin.

The judiciary is a largely responsive body, the ability of the exec to direct policy today is incredible.
 
Yes, and so can the President.


We're not talking about constitutional matters here, we're talking about reality. Constitutionally, Congress can do all sorts of things to Courts - impeach Justices, ignore decisions, shut down courts, etc. That doesn't happen today though (unless some Justice is impeached for clear corruption; beyond that, impeachment is never done).
 
No, I am arguing about power, not activity. The Presidency is more powerful. The larger amount of activity is an extension of that power.

I agree that in practice there is no check on the decisions of the SCOTUS, and on lower courts the only real check in an appeal to a higher court, still within the judicial. They are still extremely limited in power compared to the President...who is also pretty hard to eliminate and has a lot of powers with zero checks on them. Tons. And that is a rapidly growing nuraber. And both parties and the public accept the growth of executive power.
 
they absolutely do.

SCOTUS has no ability to enforce its decisions on its own - it requires the executive to do that. The check there is simple: if the SCOTUS makes ridiculous decisions, the executive won't enforce them. Yes that's glossing over a much deeper analysis of political affiliations and relationships, but mechanically that is the check that exists.

Congress also has the ability to reassign appeals jurisdiction at its whim. I can't remeraber the case exactly (I'll find my conlaw text later), but Congress has re-legislated in limits of Supreme Court jurisdiction to avoid specific issues going to trial before.
 
And what ISO said is exactly true: the SCOTUS is a purely reactionary body. It can only rule on cases brought before it, and even then has to survive the internal Justice vs Justice ideology battles (defensive denials, aggressive grants and whatnot). Congress and the Executive are infinitely more able to lead from the front.
 
Of course.

But if the case makes it to the Supreme Court, they have the authority to agree or disagree with the President. And if they disagree, the President ceases.
 
I know all of that. Constitutionally, the Courts are the weakest branch. I stated that originally.

Practically today, however, the Courts are far superior. Imagine the outcry if a President did what Lincoln did, and ignore a Court decision. People would be rioting in the streets
 
None of that has anything to do with what I'm stating. If the President decides to do something, and the Courts 'react' by overturning what he wants to do, then by definition, the Courts are more powerful.
 
I skipped the first page and a half

That's a problem with the people then, not the system. Legitimacy is the entire backbone of the SCOTUS, are you suggesting that they've acquired... too much legitimacy?
 
Back
Top