What is your rule of thumb when it comes to respecting Supreme Court decisions?

[Anonymous]

Obviously, Supreme Court justices are experts when it comes to interpreting the Constitution. They have undergone extensive legal training. But it seems that lots of people only selectively respect their decisions. I feel like lots of non-experts believe Supreme Court decisions should only be respected when they conform to ideological biases. For example, conservative Republicans slam the Supreme Court when they rule against Trump, but seem to love the Supreme Court when the justices side with him. Liberal Democrats of course do the opposite. What do you think?

I always respect Supreme Court decisions, regardless of whether they go against my ideology or not. They are experts.

I respect Supreme Court decisions when they support my ideology or political party. I usually don't give the decision much weight when they go against my ideology or party.

[Chazmatazz269]

You are mistaken. There is no law requiring SCOTUS justices have any education and training in the law, let alone ever have worked as a lawyer. In fact, two-thirds of states allow people to sit on the bench with absolutely no education or training in law of any kind. SCOTUS judges are merely appointed from lower courts.
https://legalknowledgebase.com/which-supreme-court-justices-never-went-to-law-school

The average idiot can absolutely match wits with someone appointed to the highest court in the land who got there because of their political affiliations rather than intelligence, education, work ethic, experience and integrity. The assumption that those justices are somehow beyond reproach is pure ignorance.
To your point, most people don’t know that. They agree or disagree based on what they believe, and what they believe is what was told to them by some other idiot.
I’d be shocked if more than ten percent of US educated citizens practiced even a modicum of critical thinking. They choose a narrative first, then align themselves with rhetoric that supports it.
I sometimes compare modern politics to magic. When someone believes, no amount of evidence is necessary. When they disbelieve, no amount of evidence is adequate.
If this peculiar behavior is of interest to you, read “Being Wrong” by Kathryn Schultz. We have always been this way. There’s something about the age of the internet that has merely exacerbated what might very well be an inherent flaw in our design.

[Asker]

Right, there is no "law" behind Supreme Court justices have to be lawyers (those trained in the study of law) but I think all of them have been lawyers, at least recently.

[Chazmatazz269]

Nope. You are wrong. Read the article.

[DonaldDarko]

Depends on whether I see some kind of malignant agenda behind the decision or not. Our government is compromised in many ways.

[Asker]

Generally, do you see a malignant agenda behind those decisions that favor conservatives or liberals?

[DonaldDarko]

It could be either way, our government is corrupt.

[exitseven]

Democratrs can ignore the rulings of the supreme court with no consequence but Republicans must comply with their rulings or else the fake news will cover it 24/7.

[DrPepper12]

SCOTUS is a deeply flawed irremediable institution. That said, the remedy is CONGRESSSIONAL ACTION!!!

[Asker]

And that is the case when the Supreme Court supports your political opinions (whatever they are)?

[DrPepper12]

The constitution itself is a dysfunctional suicide pact

[Asker]

Even its beliefs about equal rights and voting?

[DrPepper12]

Not addressing cases. The institution, procedure, process, nominations, size, etc are all flawed.

[Asker]

So why is 9 flawed as a number? What is your ideal size? 7? 10? 12? 15? 24?

[DrPepper12]

18 en banc with circuit courts to match # of congressional districts

[Anonymous]

SCOTUS decisions hold has weight as democratic elections which is useless

[Asker]

Democratic elections hold tons of weight. In 2008, President Obama was democratically elected President of the United States. How can you say that that holds no weight?

[Opinion Owner]

because elections are all based on personal preferences not morality

[Anonymous]

Appeal