Supreme Court Do-Ovah

[Unkotare]

If you could snap your fingers and change ONE US Supreme Court decision from any time in US history to your liking, which would you change and how and why?

 

[Sonny Clark]

A very tough question. I'd have to review them to select just one. Right off hand, I'd have to say "search and seizure" laws. WHY? Because it's grossly abused, property is taken from innocent people, their homes and lives are invaded, personal records are examined, and in the end, they have no recourse. Once their personal property and lives have been looked at by numerous people, how can it ever be personal and private again? And, in some cases, innocent people never recover what was taken.

 

[OKTexas]

That's an easy one, when they ignored the text of the Constitution and made general welfare a generalized power of the feds without regards to the limits placed on it in the remainder of Article 1, Section 8. That single decision gave us the leviathan government we have today.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If you could snap your fingers and change ONE US Supreme Court decision from any time in US history to your liking, which would you change and how and why?

Bush v. Gore...

 

[Syriusly]

Dred Scott

 

[G.T.]

My honest opinion is that it takes years of law study, passing bars, experience with cases...etc. to come to a full-picture conclusion that a case was ruled upon incorrectly.

Admitting lack of qualifications.....just somthing the human ego cant always do.

 

[The Rabbi]

Wickard v Filburn, the "wheat care." Made a massive expansion and intrusion of the federal gov't into state business. I would take aim at that before anything else.

 

[mdk]

Korematsu v. United States

An utterly disgraceful decision.

 

[The Rabbi]

Korematsu v. United States

An utterly disgraceful decision.

There were lots of disgraceful decisions but that one has limited relevance today. Something like Brown v Board of Ed or Roe is more relevant because it set really bad precedents. Wickard was, imo, the most harmful.

 

[G.T.]

Korematsu v. United States

An utterly disgraceful decision.

Yea but what about Yokozuna vs. The Undertaker

 

[Darkwind]

Marbury v Madison...

 

[mdk]

Korematsu v. United States

An utterly disgraceful decision.

There were lots of disgraceful decisions but that one has limited relevance today. Something like Brown v Board of Ed or Roe is more relevant because it set really bad precedents. Wickard was, imo, the most harmful.

Wickard was a gross expansion of The Commerce Clause. This is I do not argue.

Wait...what? Brown set a bad precedent? In what way?

 

[The Rabbi]

Korematsu v. United States

An utterly disgraceful decision.

There were lots of disgraceful decisions but that one has limited relevance today. Something like Brown v Board of Ed or Roe is more relevant because it set really bad precedents. Wickard was, imo, the most harmful.

Wickard was a gross expansion of The Commerce Clause. This is do not argue.

Wait...what? Brown set a bad precedent? In what way?

It took what should be state issues from control of the states.

 

[G.T.]

States should each have their own choice to segregate in schools?

 

[Skylar]

If you could snap your fingers and change ONE US Supreme Court decision from any time in US history to your liking, which would you change and how and why?

In all of history? Most of the particularly egregious rulings of the past have already been rectified. Of those that remain, I'd probably pick Kelo v. City of New London or Citizens United. Though the latter is far more relevant. The former just bugs me.

 

[mdk]

Korematsu v. United States

An utterly disgraceful decision.

There were lots of disgraceful decisions but that one has limited relevance today. Something like Brown v Board of Ed or Roe is more relevant because it set really bad precedents. Wickard was, imo, the most harmful.

Wickard was a gross expansion of The Commerce Clause. This is do not argue.

Wait...what? Brown set a bad precedent? In what way?

It took what should be state issues from control of the states.

When states willfully trample the rights of it's citizens then the courts should rectify it when a case is argued before them. They don't always get it right but in the case of Brown they got it spot on.

 

[mdk]

If you could snap your fingers and change ONE US Supreme Court decision from any time in US history to your liking, which would you change and how and why?

In all of history? Most of the particularly eggregious rulings of the past have already been rectified. Of those that remain, I'd probably Kelo v. City of New London or Citizens United. Though the latter is far more relevant. The former just bugs me.

Kelo was also a disaster of a decision. Total rubbish.

 

[browsing deer]

Dred Scott. No question. Igniting a civil war makes it the most collosolly stupid opinion as well

 

[The Rabbi]

Korematsu v. United States

An utterly disgraceful decision.

There were lots of disgraceful decisions but that one has limited relevance today. Something like Brown v Board of Ed or Roe is more relevant because it set really bad precedents. Wickard was, imo, the most harmful.

Wickard was a gross expansion of The Commerce Clause. This is do not argue.

Wait...what? Brown set a bad precedent? In what way?

It took what should be state issues from control of the states.

When states willfully trample the rights of it's citizens then the courts should rectify it when a case is argued before them. They don't always get it right but in the case of Brown they got it spot on.

They did not willfully trample the rights of citizens. that was the whole point. States have the right to determine educational policies. And marriage policies. With Brown all of that went away.

 

[The Rabbi]

If you could snap your fingers and change ONE US Supreme Court decision from any time in US history to your liking, which would you change and how and why?

In all of history? Most of the particularly eggregious rulings of the past have already been rectified. Of those that remain, I'd probably Kelo v. City of New London or Citizens United. Though the latter is far more relevant. The former just bugs me.

Kelo was also a disaster of a decision. Total rubbish.

Kelo was a bad decision as far as public policy. No question. Legally it was probably the correct one baed on precedent though.