Martín Lousteau used the worst of arguments to oppose the expansion of the Court

Many things can be said to establish a position against the expansion of the Supreme Court of Justice, but Martín Lousteau does not seem very skilled at choosing a convincing one.

Thus, he tried to discredit the project by assuring that it is intended to partisan the Court, making it clear that now it is a clearly macrista Court as he likes.

But as if this were not enough, he assured that what he does is “have representatives from each of the Provinces and since most of the Provinces are Peronist, what we would have is a Peronist Supreme Court.”

Lousteau is clearly annoyed that the Court is representative of the popular vote. But in addition, the senator seems to be unaware that the candidates must have the agreement of two thirds of the Senate to be appointed, except during the macrismo that they were appointed by decree.

Beyond the different opinions, the truth is that technically the Court cannot function with only four members, since this prevents a tiebreaker in matters in which there is no absolute agreement.

But in addition, the most logical thing is that there is at least one member of the Court who is a specialist in each of the branches of law, since they normally must resolve issues that correspond to branches of law that they are unaware of or at least in which they are not experts.

The fear shown by some of the idea of ​​professionalizing the Supreme Court speaks more of those who put spokes in the wheel than of the magistrates themselves.

Leave a Comment