Democrats to propose legislation expanding the Supreme Court

[Cecilie1200]

Once again the Dimwinger party ignores the will of America and acts in the interest of party over country.

New Poll Shows 61% of Americans Oppose Joe Biden Packing the Supreme Court - LifeNews.com

Nearly two in three voters say they oppose 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden adding more Supreme Court justices if he is elected, according to a poll exclusively obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation. The Marist poll, sponsored by the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List, found...

www.lifenews.com

You mean McConnell puts his mistaken sense of what is American above country.,

Interesting how you think it's McConnell who's putting his personal preferences first, rather than President Houseplant and his handlers.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Democrats want to pick 4 more anti Republican Supreme Court Justices. I saw this a few minutes ago on Fox tv. What do you think?

foxnews.com

They're doing a six month study. It will never happen.
It should never happen. However, there should be some way to make right the seat Mitch McConnell stole from Obama. Republicans suck.

Don’t worry, you’ll soon love the idea of 13 justices

13? Let’s make it 20. Why 13? Racist!

What does the vaulted Constitution say about size of the court?

No idea. I am Not a constitutional expert. Hell make it 100. Let’s expand our Govt even more. I am agreeing with you.

Again you portray yourself as a strict constitutional republic and you don’t know what the document states?

I do? LOL show me where, filthy human. I portray Myself as a logical citizen. You believe men may identify as women. You failed basic biology.

Really, logic and you are mutual exclusive.

In reality you're just some turd posting bullshit looking for another turd to like you.

^^^Triggered^^^ LOL

Try identifying as a man and see how that goes for you

Hardly, don’t flatter yourself.

You didn't even try. So sad. Poor triggered leftist.

 

[Rambunctious]

The dems say the court is broken and they want to fix it...but the court is not broken...they don't want to fix the court they want a fixed court...but keep in mind Joe does not enjoy a clear mandate with the voters...if they push this through the dems will be a minority party for decades....and the GOP will just change it back...so go ahead stupid libs...do it....do ya feel lucky? Punks.....remember we warned ya...just like we warned Reid....

Do YOU trust the Republicans to have the guts and the follow-through to actually change it back if/when they get power again? My experience with Republicans has always been that they're afraid to use political power because Democrats might say bad things about them.

I do with something like this...the only thing the GOP cooperated with Trump on are judges....

 

[task0778]

The Democrats proposed today expanding the U.S. Supreme Court by four justices. Obvious the goal being to pack the Supreme Court with four Biden nominees which one could assume would compensate for the two extra justices that President Trump managed to appoint.

While it might seem like this is an all or nothing proposal, it can be tweeked to become a viable compromise.

1) Expand the court by two justices effective in 2022. This gives President Biden and the liberals a guaranteed two Supreme Court seats to fill.

2) Expand the court by another two justices effective in 2025. This would mean that although it is possible that Biden would have two more justices to appoint, it is equally possible a Republican president would get to fill those seats. Or that even if Biden (or another Democrat) was president in 2025, that the GOP might control the Senate giving the GOP input into the filling of the seats.

While expanding the court is NOT my preference, I think this shows that even on the most difficult issue, compromise is doable.

Opinions?

This is not viable, there is no way the Senate Repubs are going to support allowing Biden to put 2 extra liberal justices on the Court this year. Nor should they, that is not a compromise; it is capitulation. Look, at this point the democrats have no reason to believe the current arrangement is unfair or biased against them. I think the real problem is what the democrats want to do in the future, which is ramming through whatever they can without concern for constitutionality. And they don't want to compromise at all with the GOP, so why should the GOP give away anything for nothing?

And I believe any Repub who supports your 'compromise' is very likely to find himself out of a job as soon as they come up for re-election.

I think the real problem, because the GOP will not compromise, is that the Republicans want to do in the future is to do whatever they can without concern for constitutionality.

Bullshit, the Democrats were not willing to compromise when Trump was in office and the GOP ran the Senate either. I do not remember much talk then about packing the court from the Repubs; I remember plenty of bitching about some of Roberts' decisions, which to me underscores the lack of a need to pack the court with more liberals who WILL vote along partisan lines virtually every time. This court is not a rubber stamp for everything the GOP wants; but what the Dems want is a rubber stamp for all the crap THEY want.

NO - it is the Far Left and their wild-ass, ridiculous GND programs who want the ability to do whatever they want and they don't give a flyin' **** whether it is constitutional or not. They want to do shit that the next president and next Congress can't change, such as abolish the filibuster and pack the court and admit DC and PR as states. They want permanent power, and they are not going to rest until they get it. And if and when they get it will be a sorry day indeed for this country.

 

[StormAl]

The Democrats proposed today expanding the U.S. Supreme Court by four justices. Obvious the goal being to pack the Supreme Court with four Biden nominees which one could assume would compensate for the two extra justices that President Trump managed to appoint.

While it might seem like this is an all or nothing proposal, it can be tweeked to become a viable compromise.

1) Expand the court by two justices effective in 2022. This gives President Biden and the liberals a guaranteed two Supreme Court seats to fill.

2) Expand the court by another two justices effective in 2025. This would mean that although it is possible that Biden would have two more justices to appoint, it is equally possible a Republican president would get to fill those seats. Or that even if Biden (or another Democrat) was president in 2025, that the GOP might control the Senate giving the GOP input into the filling of the seats.

While expanding the court is NOT my preference, I think this shows that even on the most difficult issue, compromise is doable.

Opinions?

This is not viable, there is no way the Senate Repubs are going to support allowing Biden to put 2 extra liberal justices on the Court this year. Nor should they, that is not a compromise; it is capitulation. Look, at this point the democrats have no reason to believe the current arrangement is unfair or biased against them. I think the real problem is what the democrats want to do in the future, which is ramming through whatever they can without concern for constitutionality. And they don't want to compromise at all with the GOP, so why should the GOP give away anything for nothing?

And I believe any Repub who supports your 'compromise' is very likely to find himself out of a job as soon as they come up for re-election.

I think the real problem, because the GOP will not compromise, is that the Republicans want to do in the future is to do whatever they can without concern for constitutionality.

Bullshit, the Democrats were not willing to compromise when Trump was in office and the GOP ran the Senate either. I do not remember much talk then about packing the court from the Repubs; I remember plenty of bitching about some of Roberts' decisions, which to me underscores the lack of a need to pack the court with more liberals who WILL vote along partisan lines virtually every time. This court is not a rubber stamp for everything the GOP wants; but what the Dems want is a rubber stamp for all the crap THEY want.

NO - it is the Far Left and their wild-ass, ridiculous GND programs who want the ability to do whatever they want and they don't give a flyin' **** whether it is constitutional or not. They want to do shit that the next president and next Congress can't change, such as abolish the filibuster and pack the court and admit DC and PR as states. They want permanent power, and they are not going to rest until they get it. And if and when they get it will be a sorry day indeed for this country.

Then you have no complaint now that the GOP won't comprise.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Democrats proposed today expanding the U.S. Supreme Court by four justices. Obvious the goal being to pack the Supreme Court with four Biden nominees which one could assume would compensate for the two extra justices that President Trump managed to appoint.

While it might seem like this is an all or nothing proposal, it can be tweeked to become a viable compromise.

1) Expand the court by two justices effective in 2022. This gives President Biden and the liberals a guaranteed two Supreme Court seats to fill.

2) Expand the court by another two justices effective in 2025. This would mean that although it is possible that Biden would have two more justices to appoint, it is equally possible a Republican president would get to fill those seats. Or that even if Biden (or another Democrat) was president in 2025, that the GOP might control the Senate giving the GOP input into the filling of the seats.

While expanding the court is NOT my preference, I think this shows that even on the most difficult issue, compromise is doable.

Opinions?

This is not viable, there is no way the Senate Repubs are going to support allowing Biden to put 2 extra liberal justices on the Court this year. Nor should they, that is not a compromise; it is capitulation. Look, at this point the democrats have no reason to believe the current arrangement is unfair or biased against them. I think the real problem is what the democrats want to do in the future, which is ramming through whatever they can without concern for constitutionality. And they don't want to compromise at all with the GOP, so why should the GOP give away anything for nothing?

And I believe any Repub who supports your 'compromise' is very likely to find himself out of a job as soon as they come up for re-election.

I think the real problem, because the GOP will not compromise, is that the Republicans want to do in the future is to do whatever they can without concern for constitutionality.

Oh, right, the problem isn't the Democrats doing whatever they want without concern for the Constitution; it's what Republicans MIGHT do in the future that we really need to worry about.

And since I really doubt you'll figure this out on your own, that was sarcasm.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Democrats proposed today expanding the U.S. Supreme Court by four justices. Obvious the goal being to pack the Supreme Court with four Biden nominees which one could assume would compensate for the two extra justices that President Trump managed to appoint.

While it might seem like this is an all or nothing proposal, it can be tweeked to become a viable compromise.

1) Expand the court by two justices effective in 2022. This gives President Biden and the liberals a guaranteed two Supreme Court seats to fill.

2) Expand the court by another two justices effective in 2025. This would mean that although it is possible that Biden would have two more justices to appoint, it is equally possible a Republican president would get to fill those seats. Or that even if Biden (or another Democrat) was president in 2025, that the GOP might control the Senate giving the GOP input into the filling of the seats.

While expanding the court is NOT my preference, I think this shows that even on the most difficult issue, compromise is doable.

Opinions?

This is not viable, there is no way the Senate Repubs are going to support allowing Biden to put 2 extra liberal justices on the Court this year. Nor should they, that is not a compromise; it is capitulation. Look, at this point the democrats have no reason to believe the current arrangement is unfair or biased against them. I think the real problem is what the democrats want to do in the future, which is ramming through whatever they can without concern for constitutionality. And they don't want to compromise at all with the GOP, so why should the GOP give away anything for nothing?

And I believe any Repub who supports your 'compromise' is very likely to find himself out of a job as soon as they come up for re-election.

I think the real problem, because the GOP will not compromise, is that the Republicans want to do in the future is to do whatever they can without concern for constitutionality.

Bullshit, the Democrats were not willing to compromise when Trump was in office and the GOP ran the Senate either. I do not remember much talk then about packing the court from the Repubs; I remember plenty of bitching about some of Roberts' decisions, which to me underscores the lack of a need to pack the court with more liberals who WILL vote along partisan lines virtually every time. This court is not a rubber stamp for everything the GOP wants; but what the Dems want is a rubber stamp for all the crap THEY want.

NO - it is the Far Left and their wild-ass, ridiculous GND programs who want the ability to do whatever they want and they don't give a flyin' **** whether it is constitutional or not. They want to do shit that the next president and next Congress can't change, such as abolish the filibuster and pack the court and admit DC and PR as states. They want permanent power, and they are not going to rest until they get it. And if and when they get it will be a sorry day indeed for this country.

Then you have no complaint now that the GOP won't comprise.

Congratulations. I think this is the most random non sequitur of a "What the **** are you talking about?!" post I have seen all week. And that's really saying something on THIS board.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The dems say the court is broken and they want to fix it...but the court is not broken...they don't want to fix the court they want a fixed court...but keep in mind Joe does not enjoy a clear mandate with the voters...if they push this through the dems will be a minority party for decades....and the GOP will just change it back...so go ahead stupid libs...do it....do ya feel lucky? Punks.....remember we warned ya...just like we warned Reid....

Do YOU trust the Republicans to have the guts and the follow-through to actually change it back if/when they get power again? My experience with Republicans has always been that they're afraid to use political power because Democrats might say bad things about them.

I do with something like this...the only thing the GOP cooperated with Trump on are judges....

Let me put it this way. If I don't see them fighting this nonsense tooth-and-nail right now, then I sure as **** won't trust them to have the stones to put it right later. So I'd strongly suggest the Republicans show me something in the present moment.

 

[Rambunctious]

The dems say the court is broken and they want to fix it...but the court is not broken...they don't want to fix the court they want a fixed court...but keep in mind Joe does not enjoy a clear mandate with the voters...if they push this through the dems will be a minority party for decades....and the GOP will just change it back...so go ahead stupid libs...do it....do ya feel lucky? Punks.....remember we warned ya...just like we warned Reid....

Do YOU trust the Republicans to have the guts and the follow-through to actually change it back if/when they get power again? My experience with Republicans has always been that they're afraid to use political power because Democrats might say bad things about them.

I do with something like this...the only thing the GOP cooperated with Trump on are judges....

Let me put it this way. If I don't see them fighting this nonsense tooth-and-nail right now, then I sure as **** won't trust them to have the stones to put it right later. So I'd strongly suggest the Republicans show me something in the present moment.

As do I...I just got into it with McCarthy's office over his silence on the capitol murder and the fence....its ridiculous...but that's what it will take.....it will take our voices shouting at them everyday until they get the message...this is what libs do to their reps....

 

[dblack]

Pelosi says she won't back this legislation. Hopefully Dems are realizing that Republicans will be back. And that whatever new power they give themselves will be used against them.

 

[San Souci]

It is funny that Mitch the republican blocked Obama's nomination to the Supreme court on the excuse of let the people decide in the election. 4 years later when Trump had a couple of months left, he pushed the vote to install the nominee. Was that stacking the courts based on political ideology?

now repubs are complaining that the Demos are packing the court. Something that they do also.

Well Congress has the power to raise the number of court members. Personally I would love to see each party to have a select number of 5 each. Yeah there would be some dead locked but it will just take one to raise about the fray and make an impartial decision.

There are STILL 9. Do the math ,Nimrod.

Thank you for proving a point.

What point? That the President picks REPLACEMENTS with the SENATES Approval?--Simple question for your simple mind. Did Trump try to INCREASE the number of Justices to suit his agenda? He could have ,ya know.

The issues which you seem to talk over , around, and dismiss is how the Senate run by Mitchell denied Obama based on upcoming elections and quickly approval Trump nomination when there was an upcoming election with the next month. Address that if your able to. I know that you can't.

Simple question did Mitch lie in order to stack the court? If you can't answer that one, do not worry because it is obvious.

Look ,Nimrod. Read the post. The "President picks Justices AT THE APPROVAL OF THE SENATE." What part of that can't ya read? Filling a vacancy is NOT packing the court.

 

[StormAl]

Pelosi says she won't back this legislation. Hopefully Dems are realizing that Republicans will be back. And that whatever new power they give themselves will be used against them.

Republicans, sure, but the Trump Republicans are never coming back to power.

 

[dblack]

Pelosi says she won't back this legislation. Hopefully Dems are realizing that Republicans will be back. And that whatever new power they give themselves will be used against them.

Republicans, sure, but the Trump Republicans are never coming back to power.

Hopefully not. At this point, I'm making NO bets.

 

[StormAl]

It is funny that Mitch the republican blocked Obama's nomination to the Supreme court on the excuse of let the people decide in the election. 4 years later when Trump had a couple of months left, he pushed the vote to install the nominee. Was that stacking the courts based on political ideology?

now repubs are complaining that the Demos are packing the court. Something that they do also.

Well Congress has the power to raise the number of court members. Personally I would love to see each party to have a select number of 5 each. Yeah there would be some dead locked but it will just take one to raise about the fray and make an impartial decision.

There are STILL 9. Do the math ,Nimrod.

Thank you for proving a point.

What point? That the President picks REPLACEMENTS with the SENATES Approval?--Simple question for your simple mind. Did Trump try to INCREASE the number of Justices to suit his agenda? He could have ,ya know.

The issues which you seem to talk over , around, and dismiss is how the Senate run by Mitchell denied Obama based on upcoming elections and quickly approval Trump nomination when there was an upcoming election with the next month. Address that if your able to. I know that you can't.

Simple question did Mitch lie in order to stack the court? If you can't answer that one, do not worry because it is obvious.

Yes, Mitchell lied.

 

[sartre play]

John Roberts brilliant man, watched his whole confirmation hearing, No way could he not be seated. Did I think he was a little more corporation minded than would be in the country's best interest yes, Did I also think he would be mindful of /and know the laws of the land. Yes. We have done some picking not from those at the top of the class. but some quite a bit farther down the list, done In the name of political party. Not quality of applicant.

 

[eagle7-31]

It's true: Democrats have court-packing on the menu - American Thinker

Why the demrats and looney left wing needs to pack the courts is a good question since most of the recent rulings have been in their favor.

News broke on Wednesday that Democrats have prepared bills for both the House and the Senate aimed at increasing the Supreme Court from the current nine justices to thirteen. Were this to pass and new justices to be added, the Supreme Court would cease to be a body that reflects the back and forth of elections, with presidents of one party or another getting the opportunity to add new justices as old ones leave. Instead, it would simply become an unelected quasi-legislative body that pretends every item on the leftist wish list is encompassed in a "living" Constitution.

The Intercept reports that, in the House, the legislators behind the bill are Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), and Mondaire Jones (D-N.Y.). Just to give a sense of the IQ behind this trio, Johnson thinks islands, if their population becomes too great, can tip over. (And no, his retrofitted excuse did not remove the stain of that idiotic statement.) Nadler is the shriveled gnome who insisted that Antifa violence in Portland is a myth. (The myth just burned a federal building.) Jones is the generic new Democrat: Stanford and Harvard Law grad, black, gay, demanding Sen. Josh Hawley's expulsion, refusing to work with Republicans, etc. (And no, his "elite" credentials do not impress me since the odor of affirmative action hangs heavily around him. He's also graduated so recently that both of those institutions were focused more on indoctrination than education.)

 

[tyroneweaver]

just can't give em enough power can ya.
If they do get total control I wonder how many atv/utv trails will be shut down out here in the west

 

[mudwhistle]

It's true: Democrats have court-packing on the menu - American Thinker

Why the demrats and looney left wing needs to pack the courts is a good question since most of the recent rulings have been in their favor.

News broke on Wednesday that Democrats have prepared bills for both the House and the Senate aimed at increasing the Supreme Court from the current nine justices to thirteen. Were this to pass and new justices to be added, the Supreme Court would cease to be a body that reflects the back and forth of elections, with presidents of one party or another getting the opportunity to add new justices as old ones leave. Instead, it would simply become an unelected quasi-legislative body that pretends every item on the leftist wish list is encompassed in a "living" Constitution.

The Intercept reports that, in the House, the legislators behind the bill are Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), and Mondaire Jones (D-N.Y.). Just to give a sense of the IQ behind this trio, Johnson thinks islands, if their population becomes too great, can tip over. (And no, his retrofitted excuse did not remove the stain of that idiotic statement.) Nadler is the shriveled gnome who insisted that Antifa violence in Portland is a myth. (The myth just burned a federal building.) Jones is the generic new Democrat: Stanford and Harvard Law grad, black, gay, demanding Sen. Josh Hawley's expulsion, refusing to work with Republicans, etc. (And no, his "elite" credentials do not impress me since the odor of affirmative action hangs heavily around him. He's also graduated so recently that both of those institutions were focused more on indoctrination than education.)

Court-packing is infrastructure now....did you know that?

 

[struth]

We knew this was going to happen...it's what leftwing tyrants have done throughout history. An independent judiciary is a threat and obstacle to authoritarianism

How judiciary helped Hitler and Stalin in destroying political opposition

Judges in Nazi Germany were instructed that in the event of any conflict between Nazi Party and law, Nazi Party should always succeed.

theprint.in

Here's a great Law Review Article from 1993: "They Shoot Lawyers Don't They?" https://scholarlycommons.law.cwsl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1378&context=cwilj

 

[Coyote]

Republicans deserve to have a packed court after their stunt with Garland. The American people however do not. Really bad idea, I agree with Breyer on this, I hope this does not gain much traction.