'We are not imperial': Justice Kagan says Supreme Court still subject to checks and balances | CNN Politics
www.cnn.com
Justice Elena Kagan declined Thursday to outright answer the question of whether Congress could impose an ethics code on the Supreme Court, but she did allow that it could do “various things” to regulate the high court.

Justice Elena Kagan declined Thursday to outright answer the question of whether Congress could impose an ethics code on the Supreme Court, but she did allow that it could do “various things” to regulate the high court.

“It just can’t be that the court is the only institution that is somehow not subject to any checks and balances from anybody else,” she said, adding, “I mean, we are not imperial.”

“We, too, are part of a checks and balances system,” she said.

  • @SendMePhotos
    5•1 year ago

    I’m curious because I just know not.

    How is it not closer?

    • girlfreddy
      3•1 year ago

      @SendMePhotos @echo64

      Mainly because the UK’s parliament is Westminster-based, the House of Lords are appointed (not elected) for life, and it’s there to act as a check against the House of Commons (who are elected) so no majority gov’t could just pass any laws, etc that they want.

      Canada’s gov’t is the same (except we call it the Senate vs House of Lords instead).

      • Harrison [He/Him]
        2•1 year ago

        Senators used to be appointed, and the House of Lords can no longer check the house of Commons, only delay.