And if the system doesn’t perform well for those less advantaged, courts aren’t the best place to defend making this systematic change. At best, it acts as a relief valve to pushing actionable political change.

Having a judge who won't rule your relatively benign protest action to be "terrorism" seems like a good way of supporting systemic change.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

But that requires the public voting. In Mexico, it also requires planning out judicial succession as the executive branch has term limits and I expect this would get propagated to the judiciary.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago

You need judicial succession anyway, given that people die, but we have plenty of examples of the intuition you express there not holding up. After all, there are no term limits for US congress people despite the strict term limits for the President.

Of course, I oppose term limits, I think they're another guardrail for capital, since the capitalists don't have a term limit on their wealth, which they can use to keep backing pliable puppets.