" (CNN)The US Supreme Court ended its most explosive term in decades this week deeply split along ideological lines, surfacing two different visions of America and the Constitution.
The nine justices, in the cases that most captured the country's attention, mirrored the rest of the nation at a perilous moment as they issued opinions with irreconcilable views on reproductive health, religion, gun rights and the environment.

As news of the decisions swept through the states, the reaction was predictable. Red states rejoiced, especially in the area of abortion, as some raced to ban or further restrict the procedure. Blue states, on the other hand, set out to digest stunning new implications that will change the way Americans live.

For their part, liberals believe that the court's majority, made possibly by Donald Trump's presidency, is rewriting the rules, decimating precedent and destabilizing the court.

Conservatives, on the other hand, believe the justices in the majority are correcting the course of constitutional jurisprudence. They realized a 50-year dream to upend what had been a constitutional right to abortion, while also bolstering a right to keep and bear arms for the first time in a decade. "

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/02/politics/supreme-court-red-blue-america-abortion-guns-climate-change/index.html

ltlee1 <ltlee1@hotmail.com> wrote:
> " (CNN)The US Supreme Court ended its most explosive term in decades
> this week deeply split along ideological lines, surfacing two
> different visions of America and the Constitution.
> The nine justices, in the cases that most captured the country's
> attention, mirrored the rest of the nation at a perilous moment as
> they issued opinions with irreconcilable views on reproductive health,
> religion, gun rights and the environment.
>
> As news of the decisions swept through the states, the reaction was
> predictable. Red states rejoiced, especially in the area of abortion,
> as some raced to ban or further restrict the procedure. Blue states,
> on the other hand, set out to digest stunning new implications that
> will change the way Americans live.
>
> For their part, liberals believe that the court's majority, made
> possibly by Donald Trump's presidency, is rewriting the rules,
> decimating precedent and destabilizing the court.
>
> Conservatives, on the other hand, believe the justices in the majority
> are correcting the course of constitutional jurisprudence. They
> realized a 50-year dream to upend what had been a constitutional right
> to abortion, while also bolstering a right to keep and bear arms for
> the first time in a decade. "
>
> https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/02/politics/supreme-court-red-blue-america-abortion-guns-climate-change/index.html

What does make it important to Chinese?
Isn't internal matter of USA?

--
A. Filip : Big (Tech) Brother is watching you.
| Trust your husband, adore your husband, and get as much as you can
| in your own name. (Joan Rivers)

On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 12:12:26 PM UTC-4, A. Filip wrote:
> ltlee1 wrote:
> > " (CNN)The US Supreme Court ended its most explosive term in decades
> > this week deeply split along ideological lines, surfacing two
> > different visions of America and the Constitution.
> > The nine justices, in the cases that most captured the country's
> > attention, mirrored the rest of the nation at a perilous moment as
> > they issued opinions with irreconcilable views on reproductive health,
> > religion, gun rights and the environment.
> >
> > As news of the decisions swept through the states, the reaction was
> > predictable. Red states rejoiced, especially in the area of abortion,
> > as some raced to ban or further restrict the procedure. Blue states,
> > on the other hand, set out to digest stunning new implications that
> > will change the way Americans live.
> >
> > For their part, liberals believe that the court's majority, made
> > possibly by Donald Trump's presidency, is rewriting the rules,
> > decimating precedent and destabilizing the court.
> >
> > Conservatives, on the other hand, believe the justices in the majority
> > are correcting the course of constitutional jurisprudence. They
> > realized a 50-year dream to upend what had been a constitutional right
> > to abortion, while also bolstering a right to keep and bear arms for
> > the first time in a decade. "
> >
> > https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/02/politics/supreme-court-red-blue-america-abortion-guns-climate-change/index.html
> What does make it important to Chinese?
> Isn't internal matter of USA?
>
It is an internal US matter showing the world that American democracy
does not work well in the US, let alone elsewhere such as China.

Democracy is not a matter of multiparty and ritualistic election.
To the degree that the two sides can comprise regarding domestic affairs,
the two party system is really not a two party system. For a genuine two
party system, polarization is inevitable. Politics, under this circumstance,
is zero-summed.

In contrast, a two party system would not be as polarized if the issues are
the like of how to divvy up a foreign banana republic. A positive summed
game.

ltlee1 <ltlee1@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 12:12:26 PM UTC-4, A. Filip wrote:
>> ltlee1 wrote:
>> > " (CNN)The US Supreme Court ended its most explosive term in decades
>> > this week deeply split along ideological lines, surfacing two
>> > different visions of America and the Constitution.
>> > The nine justices, in the cases that most captured the country's
>> > attention, mirrored the rest of the nation at a perilous moment as
>> > they issued opinions with irreconcilable views on reproductive health,
>> > religion, gun rights and the environment.
>> >
>> > As news of the decisions swept through the states, the reaction was
>> > predictable. Red states rejoiced, especially in the area of abortion,
>> > as some raced to ban or further restrict the procedure. Blue states,
>> > on the other hand, set out to digest stunning new implications that
>> > will change the way Americans live.
>> >
>> > For their part, liberals believe that the court's majority, made
>> > possibly by Donald Trump's presidency, is rewriting the rules,
>> > decimating precedent and destabilizing the court.
>> >
>> > Conservatives, on the other hand, believe the justices in the majority
>> > are correcting the course of constitutional jurisprudence. They
>> > realized a 50-year dream to upend what had been a constitutional right
>> > to abortion, while also bolstering a right to keep and bear arms for
>> > the first time in a decade. "
>> >
>> > https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/02/politics/supreme-court-red-blue-america-abortion-guns-climate-change/index.html
>> What does make it important to Chinese?
>> Isn't internal matter of USA?
>>
> It is an internal US matter showing the world that American democracy
> does not work well in the US, let alone elsewhere such as China.
>
> Democracy is not a matter of multiparty and ritualistic election.
> To the degree that the two sides can comprise regarding domestic affairs,
> the two party system is really not a two party system. For a genuine two
> party system, polarization is inevitable. Politics, under this circumstance,
> is zero-summed.
>
> In contrast, a two party system would not be as polarized if the issues are
> the like of how to divvy up a foreign banana republic. A positive summed
> game.

It works in it's (frequently) messy way. Our common version may be
"In practice it is not as perfect (friction free) as advertised" :-)

<irony> SCOTUS gave back states right to regulate abortions via laws
introduces by democratic process. Isn't it Yet Another Victory of USA
Democracy over overreaching judiciary _delivered by judiciary_ ? ;-)
</irony>

I do not buy superiority of One Party system.
IMHO One party system is too likely to degenerate (over time).
"You do not have to be good. It is enough to be the best".

--
A. Filip : Big (Tech) Brother is watching you.
| You don't sew with a fork, so I see no reason to eat with knitting
| needles. (Miss Piggy, on eating Chinese Food)

On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 11:12:20 PM UTC-4, A. Filip wrote:
> ltlee1 wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 12:12:26 PM UTC-4, A. Filip wrote:
> >> ltlee1 wrote:
> >> > " (CNN)The US Supreme Court ended its most explosive term in decades
> >> > this week deeply split along ideological lines, surfacing two
> >> > different visions of America and the Constitution.
> >> > The nine justices, in the cases that most captured the country's
> >> > attention, mirrored the rest of the nation at a perilous moment as
> >> > they issued opinions with irreconcilable views on reproductive health,
> >> > religion, gun rights and the environment.
> >> >
> >> > As news of the decisions swept through the states, the reaction was
> >> > predictable. Red states rejoiced, especially in the area of abortion,
> >> > as some raced to ban or further restrict the procedure. Blue states,
> >> > on the other hand, set out to digest stunning new implications that
> >> > will change the way Americans live.
> >> >
> >> > For their part, liberals believe that the court's majority, made
> >> > possibly by Donald Trump's presidency, is rewriting the rules,
> >> > decimating precedent and destabilizing the court.
> >> >
> >> > Conservatives, on the other hand, believe the justices in the majority
> >> > are correcting the course of constitutional jurisprudence. They
> >> > realized a 50-year dream to upend what had been a constitutional right
> >> > to abortion, while also bolstering a right to keep and bear arms for
> >> > the first time in a decade. "
> >> >
> >> > https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/02/politics/supreme-court-red-blue-america-abortion-guns-climate-change/index.html
> >> What does make it important to Chinese?
> >> Isn't internal matter of USA?
> >>
> > It is an internal US matter showing the world that American democracy
> > does not work well in the US, let alone elsewhere such as China.
> >
> > Democracy is not a matter of multiparty and ritualistic election.
> > To the degree that the two sides can comprise regarding domestic affairs,
> > the two party system is really not a two party system. For a genuine two
> > party system, polarization is inevitable. Politics, under this circumstance,
> > is zero-summed.
> >
> > In contrast, a two party system would not be as polarized if the issues are
> > the like of how to divvy up a foreign banana republic. A positive summed
> > game.
> It works in it's (frequently) messy way. Our common version may be
> "In practice it is not as perfect (friction free) as advertised" :-)
>
> <irony> SCOTUS gave back states right to regulate abortions via laws
> introduces by democratic process. Isn't it Yet Another Victory of USA
> Democracy over overreaching judiciary _delivered by judiciary_ ? ;-)

Unfortunately, more Americans are opposing that kind of "Democratic Victory."

"With 55% of Americans saying they mostly support abortion rights,
56% of Americans oppose the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.
....
A majority of Americans (57%) think the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v.
Wade was politically motivated and not motivated by the law of the land (36%). "
https://maristpoll.marist.edu/polls/npr-pbs-newshour-marist-national-poll-the-overturning-of-roe-v-wade-june-2022/
> </irony>
>
> I do not buy superiority of One Party system.
The form of any democracy is a matter to be determined by the people.
No one has to buy the superiority of other nation's democratic system.

> IMHO One party system is too likely to degenerate (over time).
> "You do not have to be good. It is enough to be the best".
> --
> A. Filip : Big (Tech) Brother is watching you.
> | You don't sew with a fork, so I see no reason to eat with knitting
> | needles. (Miss Piggy, on eating Chinese Food)

On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 11:40:56 PM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
> " (CNN)The US Supreme Court ended its most explosive term in decades this week deeply split along ideological lines, surfacing two different visions of America and the Constitution.
> The nine justices, in the cases that most captured the country's attention, mirrored the rest of the nation at a perilous moment as they issued opinions with irreconcilable views on reproductive health, religion, gun rights and the environment.
>
> As news of the decisions swept through the states, the reaction was predictable. Red states rejoiced, especially in the area of abortion, as some raced to ban or further restrict the procedure. Blue states, on the other hand, set out to digest stunning new implications that will change the way Americans live.
>
> For their part, liberals believe that the court's majority, made possibly by Donald Trump's presidency, is rewriting the rules, decimating precedent and destabilizing the court.
>
> Conservatives, on the other hand, believe the justices in the majority are correcting the course of constitutional jurisprudence. They realized a 50-year dream to upend what had been a constitutional right to abortion, while also bolstering a right to keep and bear arms for the first time in a decade. "
>
> https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/02/politics/supreme-court-red-blue-america-abortion-guns-climate-change/index.html

The supreme court can now upend a 50 years old of abortion law to abort, they should also can upend the constitutional right to gun ownership too.