Q & A of the day: Do we need to rethink the Supreme Court's 'supreme power'?
This is not an article but a Question and Answer section. The Supreme Court is playing lead role in one high-octane drama and a few low-budget flicks.
The one we all have tickets for is the Affordable Healthcare Act now before the "Lords and Ladies" of the bench. Fans of Team Obama says the Act needs to stand and Team "Anti-healthcare" says it is unconstitutional, hoping the Court overturns the historic piece of legislation - the first in 100 years.
Another case raising eyebrows is one the Justices ruled on recently, making strip searches legal in all arrests. Strip search in all arrests? So if someone is hauled in for jumping the turnstile in the subway for they didn't have the fare, they will be strip-searched.
Then there is their ruling that Coporate Personhood should stand, opening the floodgates for enormous unchecked amounts of money to be poured into this election campaign by coporations, essentially putting the Presidency on sale like never before.
Now there is rumble among the masses that the Court's absolute power may need a bit of "reining in." Their "serve for life" positions are also being questioned. Being the ones to decide on whether we get healthcare through the Affordable Act is making others argue that they may not be the ones to do so when they receive some pretty platinum-quality insurance from the federal Government.
Then there is the partisan divide on the bench. Many argue that there is too much politics and too much ideology flowing from those robes these days to make impartial judgements.
This is some radical thinking, but those opposed say it is time for some serious re-thinking of our entire political system, including the Supreme Court, the Senate, Congress and even the Constitution.
I told you it was "way radical!"
What do you say? Don't be shy, let it rip.