roberts’ reasoning is fundamentally (lower-case “r”) anti-republican. i know we dunk on the framers here but roberts has issued a rebuke of the revolutionary assumption that concentrated, unaccountable power is a fundamental threat to liberty.
It's just hilariously disingenuous. Imagine looking at, say, ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY and concluding that the biggest threat to liberty isn't abuse of power, but powerful people refraining from sufficiently wielding their authority out of fear that they might one day be held accountable.
roberts essentially ignores the purpose of separation of powers, which was not to create entirely separate spheres of action but to prevent the emergence of unchecked authority. instead, he says, separation of powers *demands* unchecked authority.
Seems to me that following that argument presidents can just appoint whomever they want now to court, Senate confirmation is not necessary. Can't have congress interfering with executive like that. They are mere "advisory." Wonder what would happen if Biden sent 6 new justices their way?
Roberts objects? He's removed from bench by Secret Service. Who you going to call Roberts? Admittedly Trump would simply counter strike the same way. But keep this up for a few administrations and you get rid of lifetime appointments.
