Leftists upset that President Donald Trump will get to shape the Supreme Court in a conservative direction are increasingly embracing a radical plan to expand the number of seats on the court once Democrats retake Congress and the White House.
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement gives Trump the chance to nominate a second conservative to the court before he’s halfway through his first term in office.
Liberal justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are 85 and 79-years-old, respectively, so it’s not unforeseeable that Trump could get to fill two more seats before he leaves the White House, potentially guaranteeing a conservative majority on the court for decades to come.
Now some liberals argue Democrats should simply expand the number of court seats — and then immediately fill the new ones with left-wing jurists — as soon as they take back control of Congress and the White House.
The Constitution doesn’t require a set number of seats on the court and leaves that power to Congress, which hasn’t altered the size of the Supreme Court since last setting it at nine in 1869.
“Democrats have no choice but to implement structural reforms to the judiciary if they hope to prevent decades of rule by the alt-right in America,” HuffPost reporter Zach Carter claimed in a Thursday article.
“At a minimum, that will mean expanding the Supreme Court bench to 11 justices under the next Democratic president. Other reforms, including term limits to remove aging conservatives, may well be appropriate.”
That is how leftists operate: if you can't win under the current structure, change the rules.
June 28, 2018, 04:54 PM
JALLEN
quote:
Originally posted by olfuzzy: I don't know what to say about this idea.
Leftists upset that President Donald Trump will get to shape the Supreme Court in a conservative direction are increasingly embracing a radical plan to expand the number of seats on the court once Democrats retake Congress and the White House.
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement gives Trump the chance to nominate a second conservative to the court before he’s halfway through his first term in office.
Liberal justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are 85 and 79-years-old, respectively, so it’s not unforeseeable that Trump could get to fill two more seats before he leaves the White House, potentially guaranteeing a conservative majority on the court for decades to come.
Now some liberals argue Democrats should simply expand the number of court seats — and then immediately fill the new ones with left-wing jurists — as soon as they take back control of Congress and the White House.
The Constitution doesn’t require a set number of seats on the court and leaves that power to Congress, which hasn’t altered the size of the Supreme Court since last setting it at nine in 1869.
“Democrats have no choice but to implement structural reforms to the judiciary if they hope to prevent decades of rule by the alt-right in America,” HuffPost reporter Zach Carter claimed in a Thursday article.
“At a minimum, that will mean expanding the Supreme Court bench to 11 justices under the next Democratic president. Other reforms, including term limits to remove aging conservatives, may well be appropriate.”
60 votes in the Senate. Veto. Veto override. Then, who nominates those additional justices?
Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.
When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson
"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown
June 28, 2018, 04:56 PM
BBMW
I had thought of this. Packing the court. I think FDR floated the idea when the SCOTUS of the day shut down a few of his programs.
quote:
Originally posted by olfuzzy: I don't know what to say about this idea.
Leftists upset that President Donald Trump will get to shape the Supreme Court in a conservative direction are increasingly embracing a radical plan to expand the number of seats on the court once Democrats retake Congress and the White House.
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement gives Trump the chance to nominate a second conservative to the court before he’s halfway through his first term in office.
Liberal justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are 85 and 79-years-old, respectively, so it’s not unforeseeable that Trump could get to fill two more seats before he leaves the White House, potentially guaranteeing a conservative majority on the court for decades to come.
Now some liberals argue Democrats should simply expand the number of court seats — and then immediately fill the new ones with left-wing jurists — as soon as they take back control of Congress and the White House.
The Constitution doesn’t require a set number of seats on the court and leaves that power to Congress, which hasn’t altered the size of the Supreme Court since last setting it at nine in 1869.
“Democrats have no choice but to implement structural reforms to the judiciary if they hope to prevent decades of rule by the alt-right in America,” HuffPost reporter Zach Carter claimed in a Thursday article.
“At a minimum, that will mean expanding the Supreme Court bench to 11 justices under the next Democratic president. Other reforms, including term limits to remove aging conservatives, may well be appropriate.”
At some point, society will realize that these leftist aren't reasonable people who can share rule with other ideologies.
June 28, 2018, 04:58 PM
RHINOWSO
quote:
Originally posted by mbinky: That is how leftists operate: if you can't win under the current structure, change the rules.
Truth.
June 28, 2018, 05:04 PM
ChicagoSigMan
[QUOTE] “Democrats have no choice but to implement structural reforms to the judiciary if they hope to prevent decades of rule by the alt-right in America,” HuffPost reporter Zach Carter claimed in a Thursday article. /QUOTE]
No choice? How bout they just win elections?
And for all the whining about having to live under decades of rule by the right, they sure don't seem to have a problem with making us live under decades of rule by the progressive left?
And it sure seems that leftists can't see very far past their own noses. What do they think will happen when the GOP regains control? They will simply follow the example of the leftists and add more seats to the court and fill them to regain a majority. It will go back and forth like this until we have 100 justices on the court.
Even though every one of Harry Reid's tactics backfired on them once the GOP gained power, the Dems never seem to learn. They can't seem to figure out that when they change the rules, the new ones can be used by Republicans too.
June 28, 2018, 05:05 PM
BB61
quote:
Originally posted by olfuzzy: I don't know what to say about this idea.
Leftists upset that President Donald Trump will get to shape the Supreme Court in a conservative direction are increasingly embracing a radical plan to expand the number of seats on the court once Democrats retake Congress and the White House.
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement gives Trump the chance to nominate a second conservative to the court before he’s halfway through his first term in office.
Liberal justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer are 85 and 79-years-old, respectively, so it’s not unforeseeable that Trump could get to fill two more seats before he leaves the White House, potentially guaranteeing a conservative majority on the court for decades to come.
Now some liberals argue Democrats should simply expand the number of court seats — and then immediately fill the new ones with left-wing jurists — as soon as they take back control of Congress and the White House.
The Constitution doesn’t require a set number of seats on the court and leaves that power to Congress, which hasn’t altered the size of the Supreme Court since last setting it at nine in 1869.
“Democrats have no choice but to implement structural reforms to the judiciary if they hope to prevent decades of rule by the alt-right in America,” HuffPost reporter Zach Carter claimed in a Thursday article.
“At a minimum, that will mean expanding the Supreme Court bench to 11 justices under the next Democratic president. Other reforms, including term limits to remove aging conservatives, may well be appropriate.”
FDR wanted to pack the court too. He backed down AIRC.
__________________________
June 28, 2018, 05:10 PM
jhe888
FDR did have a court packing plan to expand the number of justices.
He didn't do it, but mostly because the Supremes stopped striking down New Deal legislation pretty quickly after the threat. He probably had the votes to get it done.
The court could be expanded in number, but it would take having the Presidency and the House and the Senate OR the House and Senate with a veto-proof super majority.
Term limits on judges would take a constitutional amendment.
The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything.
June 28, 2018, 05:15 PM
feersum dreadnaught
quote:
Originally posted by tanner: This comment about sums it all up for the Dems.
“What immigrants?”
NRA Life Member - "Fear God and Dreadnaught"
June 28, 2018, 05:57 PM
berto
Can't wait for a Supreme Court with 1,001 members after each side packs it every 4-12 years.
June 28, 2018, 07:01 PM
flashguy
quote:
Originally posted by olfuzzy: I don't know what to say about this idea.
Leftists upset that President Donald Trump will get to shape the Supreme Court in a conservative direction are increasingly embracing a radical plan to expand the number of seats on the court once Democrats retake Congress and the White House.
The Constitution doesn’t require a set number of seats on the court and leaves that power to Congress, which hasn’t altered the size of the Supreme Court since last setting it at nine in 1869.
“At a minimum, that will mean expanding the Supreme Court bench to 11 justices under the next Democratic president. Other reforms, including term limits to remove aging conservatives, may well be appropriate.”
This is not a new idea.
quote:
On February 5, 1937, President Franklin Roosevelt announces a controversial plan to expand the Supreme Court to as many as 15 judges, allegedly to make it more efficient. Critics immediately charged that Roosevelt was trying to “pack” the court and thus neutralize Supreme Court justices hostile to his New Deal.
flashguy
Texan by choice, not accident of birth
June 28, 2018, 07:47 PM
Flashlightboy
Breaking now:
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has just ruled that Justice Kennedy cannot retire.
j/k
June 28, 2018, 08:20 PM
egregore
quote:
Originally posted by Flashlightboy: Breaking now:
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has just ruled that Justice Kennedy cannot retire.
j/k
Although in jest, it makes me wonder if he is receiving any pressure to change his mind and not retire.
June 28, 2018, 08:32 PM
RHINOWSO
quote:
Originally posted by egregore: Although in jest, it makes me wonder if he is receiving any pressure to change his mind and not retire.
He's an 81 year old SCOTUS judge. I highly doubt he gives a flying fuck what Leftists, whom he usually disagreed with, think of his decision to retire and spend his last 10-20 years on Earth doing as he pleases.
June 28, 2018, 09:27 PM
bald1
Certifiable member of the gun toting, septuagenarian, bucket list workin', crazed retiree, bald is beautiful club! USN (RET), COTEP #192
June 28, 2018, 09:37 PM
Bassamatic
Now that right there is funny.
.....never marry a woman who is mean to your waitress.
June 28, 2018, 10:30 PM
matai
What do you all think of Mike Lee?
He seems like he digs the Constitution.
June 28, 2018, 10:36 PM
JALLEN
quote:
Originally posted by matai: What do you all think of Mike Lee?
He seems like he digs the Constitution.
Sure. He is on the short list, and so is his brother. How about that? Two brothers on the list for Supreme Court nomination? Dad was distinguished Solicitor General, and they grew up at the Court.
I doubt he will be the nominee, for political calculation reasons more than his suitability. As a Senator, he needs to vote to confirm the new guy, or gal.This message has been edited. Last edited by: JALLEN,
Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.
When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson
"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown
