Question… how would adding four liberal justices “restore balance” to the Supreme Court?
Dems, have basically been wussies. They try to play fair…and even when they get aggressive, it is half ass. Remember when Reid made a change to the rules for fed judges, and he stopped short of applying that to the SCOTUS? then McConnel basically said…hold my beer!
Then…
McConnel not allowing debate for Garland, then seating a new justice a few weeks before election…that took huge balls.
Once again, your opinion is a crumpled bag of stale popcorn.
1 Like
That’s simply republicans running with what the Dems started. Remember the Dems filibustering a bunch of Bush’s judge nominees just because? Then Obama didn’t like it when republicans did it to him? Pepperidge Farm does.
2 Likes
It was not “just because”…they were still bitter with the Gore v Bush ruling (which was BS). Reid Stopped short of applying the “nuclear option” to the SCOTUS. McConnel, upped the BS game.
I suppose, now it is the Dems turn again.
Yup, I missed this. Thanks!
2 Likes
So it’s all republicans’ fault? Every single thing? Wow… Dems got their feewings hurt so they got rid of the filibuster…
2 Likes
“Name your replacement?”
2 Likes
Gosh who could have predicted this horse ■■■■■
From Foxnews.com. “Democratic lawmakers are set to unveil legislation Thursday to expand the number of justices on the Supreme Court.
Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and Reps. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., Hank Johnson, D-Ga., and Mondaire Jones, D-N.Y., will hold a press conference on Thursday to introduce the proposal on the steps of the Supreme Court. Given their control of the White House and the Senate, the legislation could allow them to supersede the current conservative majority by “packing” the Court with liberal justices”
Biden once called FDR’s effort to pull this stunt a “bonehead idea”…
Now libs are going for it.
Cue some liberal with some mush about Merrick Garland…
3 Likes
Pretty much yeah. This is one of the worst ideas in the long sad history of bad ideas.
But don’t believe me…from www.npr.org
“Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in an interview Tuesday that she does not favor proposals put forth by some Democratic presidential candidates who have advocated changing the number of Supreme Court justices if the Democrats win the presidency.
Ginsburg, who got herself in trouble criticizing candidate Donald Trump in 2016, this time was critical not of any particular Democratic contender, but of their proposals to offset President Trump’s two conservative appointments to the court.
“Nine seems to be a good number. It’s been that way for a long time,” she said, adding, “I think it was a bad idea when President Franklin Roosevelt tried to pack the court.”
Lefties are now proving they don’t want to have to mess with no stinking elections…the legislative process…those pesky checks and balances those old dead white slave owners wrote into that Constitution thing…
Just skip all that and pack the courts with a bunch of hard core leftists!
1 Like
Leftists think they have a right to ruin…errr…run our lives.
4 Likes
That was based on an incorrect premise; will need to redo it.
Does introducing legislation mean that the number of justices of the SC is changed per se?
I hope so, but not getting my hopes up.
First, I don’t think this is going to happen. If only two Democrats vote against it in the House, it fails. If it were somehow to pass the House, it would be necessary to end the filibuster before packing the court. That means at least having Manchin and the Senator from Arizona change their avowed positions.
This is just the extreme portion of the Democrats yelling out to do anything for power, just like the Trump group wanting to have Pence invalidate state certified electors.
If somehow Democrats did do that, it would be a declaration of political war where everything was possible as long as you got your way in the end. It justifies the steps Trump would have taken to retain power if he could have done so. It is Latin American anything goes tanks rolling in the street political warfare.
Enough know this so it will not happen.
4 Likes
What nonsense. Reid stopped short of applying his change of rules to the Supreme Court for the simple reason that there were no open seats on the supreme court during his time where he needed this to put anyone in the SC.
Reid ended the filibuster for the courts. He even stated in October 2016 that he expected the rule to be changed for the Supreme Court too, when Hilary became President and the Democrats took the Senate. And he bragged that he had opened the door for this to happen.
"Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is predicting a Democratic-majority Senate next year could break out the “nuclear option” to change the rules on Supreme Court nominations.
The outgoing Democratic leader told Talking Points Memo that he’s paved the way for what would be a historic change of the Senate’s rules, allowing Supreme Court nominees to bypass a 60-vote procedural requirement and be approved by a simple majority."
…
“I really do believe that I have set the Senate so when I leave, we’re going to be able to get judges done with a majority,” he said. “It’s clear to me that if the Republicans try to filibuster another circuit court judge, but especially a Supreme Court justice, I’ve told 'em how and I’ve done it, not just talking about it. I did it in changing the rules of the Senate. It’ll have to be done again.”
3 Likes
Ya they keep torquing the midterm pendulum to max swing back mode.
Ruth Ginsburg “If anything would make the court look partisan,”
“I think it was a bad idea when President Franklin Roosevelt tried to pack the court.”
3 Likes
Are RBG’s other opinions to carry the same weight as the one quoted in the post or is it a case of selective quoting?
There is no rule. It’s a congressional mandate.
Simple truth.
The number of justices is determined by congress.
Now continue on your rant.
Allan
Yeah and so do righties.
It takes two to tango.
Allan
