You bet.Originally Posted by Guisslapp
And I invented electricity.
|
|
|
|
|
You bet.
And I invented electricity.
The Dems could expand it later too. It can always be expanded, so I don’t see how that could “ensure” anything.
The system only works when it enjoys the support of the governed. If a massively unpopular president tries to fundamentally change balance of power it will not endure.
Great question! Yeah, let's have a Trump WH and GOP Senate and expand the SC to 11, 13, 15! and ALL the additions be VERY conservative, and young and healthy. I'm sure Goosey would agree with that.
Actually, as I posted, I cannot fathom why anyone would not want a conservative SC.
And SCOTUS nominations have been done and confirmed several more times than that in our nations history. It wasn't until democrats started to mess with traditional procedural processes that things changed. Harry Reid, with the nuclear option, is a recent example.
Sheeet! good point. Okay, keep it at 9.
Even Reid knew that the nuclear option shouldn’t be available for something as substantial as Supreme Court confirmations.
To quote the late RGB using her own words regarding seating Supreme Court Justices during their last year
"Asked whether the Senate was obligated to consider Garland, Ginsburg replied, “That’s their job. There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being president in his last year.”
And Republicans didn’t. Which is why we will see the court expand under Biden. You heard it here first.
If Biden wins (America loses) then I suppose that is a real probability.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/why-does-supreme-court-have-nine-justices-why-can-t-ncna992851
As you posted, then the next time the GOP has control they can change it again. I wonder if, let's say, the SC is at 11 and Congress wants to bring it back to 9, can they boot two justices off the court! Why not? Guess it would come down to a vote who gets booted.
Nah! I say leave it at 9.
Blatant hypocrisy from Graham and McConnell (not that ANYONE is surprised). And there is NO way the Dems wouldn’t be doing the same thing if they had the same circumstances.
Our society doesn’t value integrity, so we have two major parties with almost no integrity between them.
Don’t see how Congress can boot living justices as under the Constitution they have lifetime appointments.
The precedent from the Judicial Circuits Act (1866) is that the next Justice to retire would not be replaced until they get to the set number. I don't think lowering the number has been addressed since.
But, basically, Congress can do it however they agree to do it.
I am just glad the republicans have not engaged in character assassination (yet) to try and preserve their perceived advantage. No, foolishly the repubs have voted overwhelmingly for dem appointments because they recognize the dems had the right to appoint them.
I am ready for the repubs to pull a Thomas or Kavanaugh type of tantrum and drag a good person through the mud, then claim some sort of moral superiority.
Figures you'd fall for whatever they are peddling. You are incapable of empathy, sympathy or pity for anyone you disagree with...which is pure narcissism.
Except for Garland, right? Or are you going with the technicality that by blocking his consideration they didn’t actually vote against the appointment.
So, a GOP Senate CAN"T vote against a Dem POTUS's nominee?
If I were a Senator I would vote against any liberal nominee, and vote for a conservative nominee. I wouldn't care if some very ugly person accused them of some sexual misconduct when they were in high school, in either case.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
