Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Ms. Toad

(38,648 posts)

3. None of the cases seem to amend the constitution.

Reply to dickthegrouch (Original post)

Wed Apr 1, 2026, 06:09 PM

Wednesday

And it is the supreme courts job to interpret the constitution. The cases seem to interpret the constitution in ways counter to its own existing interpretations, or where the supreme court has not yet ruled on the interpretation.

We seriously need better civics education in this country. (Not you, specifically - but pretty much across the board.)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

LeftInTX

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

There is only one way to CHANGE the Constitution [View all] dickthegrouch Wednesday OP

The strict Constitutionalists always seem to find a way pwb Wednesday #1

If no one hold them accountable for constitutional violations then it effectively doesn't matter. walkingman Wednesday #2

None of the cases seem to amend the constitution. Ms. Toad Wednesday #3

It was deemed necessary to amend the constitution to permit dickthegrouch Wednesday #4

Amy Coney Barrett said, "That's not textual" LeftInTX Wednesday #5