• BombOmOm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    So it’s more of a pocket veto than anything else.

    “the court affirmed the judgment of a lower court to dismiss the lawsuit”

    They upheld the judgment from the lower court. Should they instead preside over their own case? That hardly seems like a better choice than upholding the lower court’s judgement.

    • Pollo_Jack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      They could have provided enough SC justices to have a quorom but not provided any input into the quorom. Essentially, be present and go along with whatever the other justices decide.

      • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        There’s nothing in the Constitution about how many justices there has to be. I would argue that if the Supreme Court can’t get quorum we need to nominate Justices until they get it.

        • nicetriangle@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          There does appear to be some law on the books stipulating the rules around a quorum and such a law is considered valid unless struck down by said court, I suppose.

          https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1

          The Supreme Court of the United States shall consist of a Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate justices, any six of whom shall constitute a quorum.

          Same way the court technically is not limited in headcout by the constitution, either. In that case, it’s set by congress.

      • IHeartBadCode@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Just my opinion, but that sounds janky af.

        Because it’s vastly different if the four to maintain quorum were Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett versus Roberts, Gorsuch, Thomas, and Barrett.

        Basically you can stack justices to fit an outcome and that’s kind of what we don’t want.