undefined | Better HN

0 pointspapln6y ago0 comments

SCOTUS is a nearly-pure democracy. Every issue of substance is put to a vote, and everyone has freedom to act individually in anything not put to vote, along with ample funding for their desires (law clerks for work, and indivual pay for personal perks). (Namely, Q&A in session, and what they write in their opinions.) Their scope of power is sufficiently limited that favor-trading isn't very important. All that remains are the minor traditional formalities of when and where they meet and how they dress.

When your group grows beyond 9 people, that gets harder.

0 comments

pmyteh6y ago

The internal politics are still interesting, though.

"The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court" by Woodward and Armstrong looked (amongst other things) at why Nixon's new Chief Justice Warren Burger seemed unable to push the court in a more consistently conservative direction despite more conservative membership. Part of the conclusion was that he just wasn't that great at playing the internal political games required to stay in control.

Incidentally, the main source for that book was eventually revealed as one of the other Justices, Potter Stewart. It's a fascinating read.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointspapln6y ago0 comments

When your group grows beyond 9 people, that gets harder.

0 comments

pmyteh6y ago

The internal politics are still interesting, though.

Incidentally, the main source for that book was eventually revealed as one of the other Justices, Potter Stewart. It's a fascinating read.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse