This leveled the playing field in labor-management relations that had been tipped sharply toward employers starting with the Pullman Strike of 1894, when President Grover Cleveland’s administration first sought and received court injunctions against the strike to forestall its spread throughout the railroad industry. Among its key provisions was a strict limitation on the authority of federal courts to issue injunctions against unionizing, picketing, striking or assembling peaceably. The idea of imposing a term limit on Supreme Court justices is gaining traction.Ī more instructive example, Fishkin told me, involves the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932, which protected the right of workers to unionize and engage in collective bargaining. The measure bars judicial review of provisions related to drug prices, including how the rule allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices will be implemented.īusiness Column: Why we need term limits for Supreme Court justices Most recently, it was exercised in the Inflation Reduction Act, the spending plan signed by President Biden on Aug. There’s little doubt that Congress has that right. These fall into the general category of “jurisdiction-stripping,” Fishkin told me: Congress forbidding or limiting federal courts’ authority to review its laws. The Constitution says that federal judges “shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour,” which may rule out any other tenure standards.īut as Fishkin and Forbath noted, there are other options that could be more effective and more focused in reining in the court’s partisan instincts. Term limits or similar plans such as age limits could run into constitutional problems. While the Constitution gives Congress the right to set the court’s size, expansion by one party could lead to a series of tit-for-tat expansions from now to the end of recorded time. These include expanding its size to provide seats for presumably more liberal jurists or imposing term limits to keep a single bloc from dominating its deliberations for decades, long after the political environment in which they were appointed has withered away. We’ve examined the prevailing ideas for moving the court back to the center, or at least bringing its rulings closer to public sentiment, before. It’s clear that you can predict how Alito will rule by figuring out what the Republican policy is.” “People had the feeling that a good argument might persuade the court,” he says. Kennedy (who sat from 1988 to 2018) and Sandra Day O’Connor (1981-2006) occupied a moderate center. In decades past, Fishkin notes, Anthony M. Talk of America’s polarization ignores the large majorities that favor abortion rights, COVID restrictions and gun control. Business Column: America is not facing a civil war - only loudmouthed extremists
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |