on a structural level, the american government has outsourced a shockingly large amount of its state capacity to a judicial system that is, as constituted, basically designed to avoid employing subject matter expertise to resolve problems
"What if we decided things based on a zero sum adversarial system where alcoholics whose qualification for office is owning car dealerships play referee in a contest between their drinking buddies as to who can most creatively avoid acknowledging what the law says?"
I mean if you want to get to the heart of the issue I think that, at some point, you end up reiterating the old East German joke about dissolving the people and appointing another
well yeah i think it's the combination of lifetime tenure for judges, plus the overall sclerosis of the legislative branch (which has many structural causes, as you know)
I mean we keep electing Republicans; feels like it would be good to have no life tenure but 20 or 10 year terms might end up with majorities of fed soc judges on the bench?
It should be further emphasised that the right wing fed soc judiciary is ideologically opposed to subject matter experts and seeks to remove them from the administrative state
Long time since the days that someone like Chief Judge Mansfield would specifically impanel a jury with relevant knowledge of things like maritime and commercial customs based on the nature of the dispute. Many things make this harder today but still I miss that sentiment
people will talk about how we don't have state capacity--in re housing for instance--but i always think that's wrong. if we lacked state capacity you'd see huge numbers of illegally built units in high demand areas. no we've got state capacity out the wazoo. we just use it for the stupidest shit
If you want to see an awesome display of U.S. state capacity, try putting an informal traffic calming measure on a street in your neighborhood, or even an unofficial crosswalk. Instant forceful response to anything that threatens to slow traffic.
Bingo. If we lacked state capacity per se, we'd see semi/informal housing, like what typifies moderate income areas in Latin America. That we do not testifies to the strength of the state in stopping it. What we lack is the ability of the "pro-housing state" to overcome the anti housing state.
This reminds me of how a California intermediate appeals court agreed with NIMBYs that college students are a cause of "noise pollution," and thus used that justification to block housing. The court was reversed, but still, what a silly delay.
nyc is *insanely bad* on housing policy, so we're starting to see these black market effects, but it's still nothing compared to the informal settlements you see in low-state-capacity nations
Several years ago, we installed a roundabout in our little hamlet, and based on the letters to the editor, you would have thought the end was nigh. Turned out they were wrong, and now we have at least four more.
I really think that a core problem in American politics is that at some point, politicians decided they'd rather be *celebrities* than have *power*, and so Congress has basically abandoned almost all of its duties.
Probably a good third of our political problems are downstream of this one fact.
if voting weren't so much about name recognition that would be a big help to this problem, I think, but unfortunately it seems pretty clear that it is and I have no idea how to change that outside the occasional catastrophe that breaks through that fog of "eh I know them, pick them"
Comments
I'm not even sure the heart of the issue is in the judiciary
Used to be different
It is a status quo juggernaut
https://bsky.app/profile/aquel-gringo.bsky.social/post/3leyt33ruks2c
But traffic calming installations. They howl! 😜
https://bsky.app/profile/louismirante.bsky.social/post/3lexermyhwc2h
Probably a good third of our political problems are downstream of this one fact.
Actually doing things with your power risks having to answer for their consequences, so let the Imperial Presidency or the courts do it