SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Antonin Scalia, a sitting U.S. Supreme Court Justice, has died:
US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia - one of most conservative members of the high court - has died. Justice Scalia's death could shift the balance of power on the US high court, allowing President Barack Obama to add a fifth liberal justice to the court. The court's conservative majority has recently stalled major efforts by the Obama administration on climate change and immigration.
Justice Scalia, 79, was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1986. He died in his sleep early on Saturday while in West Texas for [a] hunting trip, the US Marshall service said. Justice Scalia was one of the most prominent proponents of "originalism" - a conservative legal philosophy that believes the US Constitution has a fixed meaning and does not change with the times.
Justice Scalia's death is, unsurprisingly, now being widely reported.
From the San Antonio Express News:
According to a report, Scalia arrived at the ranch on Friday and attended a private party with about 40 people. When he did not appear for breakfast, a person associated with the ranch went to his room and found a body.
[...] The U.S. Marshal Service, the Presidio County sheriff and the FBI were involved in the investigation. Officials with the law enforcement agencies declined to comment.
A federal official who asked not to be named said there was no evidence of foul play and it appeared that Scalia died of natural causes.
A gray Cadillac hearse pulled into the ranch last Saturday afternoon. The hearse came from Alpine Memorial Funeral Home.
Most major news outlets are covering this story, including CNN [video autoplays], The Washington Post, The New York Times, and NBC.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Justin Case on Sunday February 14 2016, @01:03AM
Congress has been phenomenally ineffective
That's a feature, not a bug.
Or to put it in other words, nobody's property or liberty are safe while Congress is in session.
The US system of three powerful branches of government struggling against each other was by design a way to keep any highly centralized power from running amok. The other two branches are supposed to put on the brakes.
President tries a power grab, Congress and courts should stop it.
Congress tries a power grab, President and courts should stop it.
And so on.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by opinionated_science on Sunday February 14 2016, @01:13AM
I cede your point, but would like to suggest the current status quo, is not checks and balances as intended.
It's one bunch of rich guys arguing how they are going to ripoff the publics money.
That's why toxic subjects get no tractions. Easier to argue it's someone's fault than change the system.
But I do agree, checks and balances is better than what came before...
(Score: 4, Insightful) by PinkyGigglebrain on Sunday February 14 2016, @01:50AM
note that the OP said "was", thus indicating a past tense. :)
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 14 2016, @01:16AM
Congress, by doing nothing, achieves de facto power. Courts can't directly force Congress to act. Nor can the President, either by keeping Congress in session until they legislate or executive actions that compels Congress to react to something anything. Dept of Justice (acting independently of Office of President), by way of Supreme Court finding them in general contempt, can't either. Congress has a high wall, but they can override Presidential vetoes, and ultimately control the money the President spends.
Look how much constitutional tension there is charging active Congress members with crimes...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Francis on Sunday February 14 2016, @02:05AM
No, that's not the intention. The GOP has been behaving like petulent children for years, anything short of 100% of what they want is not good enough. Years back that grand bargain over the deficit was only 90% of what they wanted, despite them having lost the elections, and that wasn't good enough.
3 branches are about checks and balances. We have a bicameral legislature so that things don't get rushed through and originally so that politicians couldn't be as easily bought. Not to enable a bunch of self-entitled asses to hold the government hostage until they get their way even as pressing issues get kicked down the road.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 14 2016, @09:33AM
Congress has been phenomenally ineffective
That's a feature, not a bug.
Don't confuse failure to govern for good governance.
For decades internet geeks have been falsely attributing the quote "the government that governs least governs best" to Thomas Jefferson. He never said it.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday February 14 2016, @11:07AM
Don't confuse failure to govern for good governance.
Don't confuse success in governance with good governance either.
For decades internet geeks have been falsely attributing the quote "the government that governs least governs best" to Thomas Jefferson. He never said it.
And because Jefferson didn't say it, it must not be true.