Stack The Court, Genius Move Democrats!

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Hillary was supposed to appoint the 5th and final SCOTUS justice who would eliminate the 1st and 2nd Amendment; the 4th died right after 9/11

What the hell are you talking about? That makes no sense at all. Even if someone want to get rid of an amendment, the SCOTUS can not do it unilaterally . Your just spewing hot air

~~~~~~
I'd say that Democrats have tried to destroy the Constitution for more than 150 years. Take for example Dem's were responsible for changing how Senators were appointed. Originally Governors appointed Senators and there was greater turn over. Today Senators are elected and spend years getting re-elected rather than doing the business of government.
Our fore fathers in their wisdom set up the legislature body of government to emulate the House of Lords (Senate) and the House of Commons (Congress). The House of Lords as appointees of the States and Congress elected by the people..

Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Is there something in there that refutes my point that SCOTUS cannot repeal an amendment or is it all a red herring and Gish Gallop ?

 

[Meister]

Since the Senate has regressed to the "Tyranny of Democracy" to fill the federal bench as well as the Supreme Court with ideologues, I expect the Democrats to use every Constitutional measure to counter the Banana Republicans attack on our once great Republic.

So you actually believe Democrats wouldn't have filled the seat
You sir, are a total and complete liar. {slap} I slap your face with my glove ...

I believe Trump and his enablers have set another bad precedent, and the country will be worse off because of it.

Both parties have added to the demise of this country's government. Make no mistake about that.

 

[BluesLegend]

Since the Senate has regressed to the "Tyranny of Democracy" to fill the federal bench as well as the Supreme Court with ideologues, I expect the Democrats to use every Constitutional measure to counter the Banana Republicans attack on our once great Republic.

So you actually believe Democrats wouldn't have filled the seat
You sir, are a total and complete liar. {slap} I slap your face with my glove ...

I believe Trump and his enablers have set another bad precedent, and the country will be worse off because of it.

You people are a joke. Dems would leap at the chance to fill a conservative seat on the court with a liberal and you people know it.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Democrat leaders are acting like a bunch of imbeciles they are going to blow this election with their putting "stacking the Supreme Court" on the table! By threatening this consequence they are giving the Republican Party a gigantic size hypodermic needle of adrenaline for the Republican Party to inject into their base and people open to voting for them it will make a measurable difference in this election. Don't Democrat leaders monitor right wing radio, these hosts en masse are cautioning their listeners that the stakes of this election are that the Democrats if they gain power are going to pack the Supreme Court with extreme liberal Justices who will do things like take away your Second Amendment right to possess a gun, your right to private health insurance, they will dramatically diminish state and individual rights culminating in Democrat liberal elitist running your life. What has unfolded is right wing radio is scaring the hell out of people about the effect of the Democrats packing the Court, Democrat leadership is incredibly foolish for giving the Republican Party this aid for this upcoming November election!

I get why the Democrat leadership has come out with such a big threat, Republicans putting Amy Coney Barrett on the Supreme Court is unfair and will turn that Court into a right-wing activist Supreme Court. Nevertheless, wisdom calls for restraint so you don't make the situation worse. Democrats need to remember that Donald Trump with his ignoring the long standing in America customs and legal standards of restraint on Presidential power changed the rules, after Trump a President can now largely do whatever he wants through Executive Order. So let's say on this ACA case currently in the Supreme Court, Judge Barrett is confirmed as a Justice and she gives the Court the additional vote to say the individual mandate is unconstitutional and even goes as far as saying therefore the ACA's whole entire scheme of the individual insurance market with communal pricing based on large enrollee pools is unconstitutional so that as a consequence people with pre-existing conditions would again be subject to insurance underwriting based on their health status in trying to get health insurance which would put the cost of that insurance out of reach for most such Americans. Well what does a President Biden do in this post-Trump world he issues an Executive Order that Medicare has to open up enrollment to Americans with pre-existing conditions unless they are high income American and he also says publicly to American seniors you are not going to pay one dollar out of your Medicare fund for this coverage expansion because I promise I will not sign one budget bill until Congress covers Medicare's monetary loss from this expansion. The bottom line is that Democrats have other options to fight this injustice and its effects other than stacking the Court!

One thing Democrats might want to consider is slightly changing the terms of the Supreme Court by this I mean the following. When one really thinks about it America has a somewhat depraved system for our Supreme Court. The current terms are that a Justice once confirmed to that bench receives a life-time appointment which necessitates the question what has that wrought America. Well in Ruth Bader Ginsburg case it wrought a hundred and seventy-five million Americans continually hoping she would not die during the Trump presidency so he would have the opportunity to choose her replacement. This RBG scenario is not the first of its kind it is often the case where the American people have to pin their hopes on a responsible Supreme Court on a responsible body which is the final arbiter of America's laws on a specific Justice not dying during a specific President's term of office, cannot we do better as a people, cannot we create a better design for the highest Court of our country! How about making the mandatory retirement age of a Supreme Court Justice seventy-two years of age that would be five years past the Social Security full retirement age, ten years past the mandatory retirement age for people in the U.S. army! If there was a mandatory retirement age than the American people would have a bigger say on who gets put on the court because they would know when a President will have a seat to fill and they could factor that in with regard to how they vote in the respective Presidential election - therefore America would be a stronger Democrat country; not to mention Justice Thomas is currently seventy-two years of age and so would have to give up his seat!

Packing the court has merit, and you actually hit on the reason why when you mentioned mandatory retirement age for federal judges. The lifetime appointment precedent began when a "lifetime" for a white male, which was the only demographic that could even be a SCOTUS justice, was 50 years. I mean an appointment straight out of law school would only give a judge 25 years of service. Now, those judges could sit on the bench for 50 years, or more. Society changes, and it can change a lot in half a century. Why would a changing society accept a judicial branch that was appointed decades ago, under different social dynamics and with different judicial prudence. It makes no sense.

Furthermore, the elimination of the filibuster for SCOTUS nominees, an action of the Republican party, pretty much removed all pretense that a judge should be appointed on their merits, and not their political positions. Make no mistake about it, the founders would be absolutely appalled at what is happening now. I mean I will admit it, Sotomayer and Kagen, they got no business on the Supreme Court, seriously. There are far better jurists out there that would better serve our nation. They were partisan picks, period. But Kavenaugh and Barrett, well I got to say it. They are both absolute, certifiable, KOOKS. Kavenaugh demonstrated his eccentric personality during his hearing, I mean he literally came unglued. Most certainly showing he did not have the temperment required of a SCOTUS justice. Not to mention the fact that he has been a Republican operative for, oh I don't know, about TWO DECADES. But Barrett, well she is beyond the pale. For all intents and purposes she is the member of a religious cult. But a cult with some really strange views. For instance, you can't keep guns away from a felon, but you can deny them the right to vote. WTF. How does that make sense. And she is all about protecting life, I mean signed a document and everything. She believes one should protect life until natural death, except for the death penalty. Which makes no damn sense whatsoever. If you oppose abortion, which I do, then you should oppose the death penalty, which I do. Barrett does not have that moral integrity.

If you don't what the court packed, then bring back the filibuster. Sixty votes to confirm a nomination. And presidents need to start nominating the most qualified jurists, not the jurists they believe will tow the party line. Because what we have now is not what the founders intended. What we have now is court nominees based on political leanings, it is the antithesis of what the founders envisioned. And the Barrett nomination is a glaring example of what is wrong with the process. The opportunistic little twit has positioned herself for this nomination and she needs to be called out on it.

Supreme court justices are not supposed to be influenced by a changing society. They are not legislators.

 

[BlindBoo]

Since the Senate has regressed to the "Tyranny of Democracy" to fill the federal bench as well as the Supreme Court with ideologues, I expect the Democrats to use every Constitutional measure to counter the Banana Republicans attack on our once great Republic.

To paraphrase, Republicans won the Senate and White House they didn't appoint activist liberal justices we are going to throw a tantrum because we didn't get our way and stack the court.

Paraphrasing is for idiots. If the Democrats are returned to power in all three branched by the people, they would be fools not to use the raw political power needed to undo the damage Trumpybears has inflicted on the USA.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Hillary was supposed to appoint the 5th and final SCOTUS justice who would eliminate the 1st and 2nd Amendment; the 4th died right after 9/11

What the hell are you talking about? That makes no sense at all. Even if someone want to get rid of an amendment, the SCOTUS can not do it unilaterally . Your just spewing hot air

You disagree with what Doc7505 ? Are you so ignorant of how things work that you actually think that SCOTUS could repeal and amendment? What is perhaps even more ridiculous is the idea that Democrats want to repeal the 1st and 2nd Amendments

What really gets me is all this talk about judicial activism. Legislating from the bench. Yet Heller was the biggest example of judicial activism in the history of this country. For over two hundred years the second amendment was a collective right, not an individual right. It had nothing, I mean nothing at all to do with personal protection. Jesus Christ, when the Constitution was signed it was too damn dangerous to allow individual citizens to keep "arms" in their home. The indians might get them. I mean for the love of God, where were the British going prior to the battles of Lexington and Concord? To the FREAKING ARMOURY, because that is where the guns were. They wouldn't even have bothered to march if everyone was keeping their guns in their home.

When the Constitution was written everyone had firearms in their homes. Everyone. That's how they put dinner on the table. By 11 years old boys were expected to be proficient enough with a rifle to get food. Did you think there was a village armory someplace?

 

[beautress]

Hillary was supposed to appoint the 5th and final SCOTUS justice who would eliminated the 1st and 2nd Amendment; the 4th died right after 9/11

Instead, Hillary just had her phone records made available online this past week.

It must be difficult for our dear Attorney General to making heads or tails out of that information abyss. There's so much graft there. I pray for this sad time of American justice. May God strengthen those who must deal with the Democrat goal to throw out courtesy and kindness and replace goodness with paranoid distrust. I saw a considerable lot of hatred against the best qualified woman for Supreme Court Justice. I hope the Republicans will just call out the vote yes or no for the candidate. The circus is over. imho.

 

[BlindBoo]

When the Constitution was written everyone had firearms in their homes. Everyone.

Mostly just white males who were also expected to be in the Militias too.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Hillary was supposed to appoint the 5th and final SCOTUS justice who would eliminate the 1st and 2nd Amendment; the 4th died right after 9/11

What the hell are you talking about? That makes no sense at all. Even if someone want to get rid of an amendment, the SCOTUS can not do it unilaterally . Your just spewing hot air

You are yet another one lantern2814 who can only muster enough brain power to give me a funny but not enough to refute my point or to engage in an adult discussion of the issue.

 

[B. Kidd]

Since the Senate has regressed to the "Tyranny of Democracy" to fill the federal bench as well as the Supreme Court with ideologues, I expect the Democrats to use every Constitutional measure to counter the Banana Republicans attack on our once great Republic.

Man, you have truly OD'd on leftist kool-aid combined with TDS fevah!
You've turned into the shell of the poster that you used to be!
Your cred credit card is used up!!

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Democrat leaders are acting like a bunch of imbeciles they are going to blow this election with their putting "stacking the Supreme Court" on the table! By threatening this consequence they are giving the Republican Party a gigantic size hypodermic needle of adrenaline for the Republican Party to inject into their base and people open to voting for them it will make a measurable difference in this election. Don't Democrat leaders monitor right wing radio, these hosts en masse are cautioning their listeners that the stakes of this election are that the Democrats if they gain power are going to pack the Supreme Court with extreme liberal Justices who will do things like take away your Second Amendment right to possess a gun, your right to private health insurance, they will dramatically diminish state and individual rights culminating in Democrat liberal elitist running your life. What has unfolded is right wing radio is scaring the hell out of people about the effect of the Democrats packing the Court, Democrat leadership is incredibly foolish for giving the Republican Party this aid for this upcoming November election!

I get why the Democrat leadership has come out with such a big threat, Republicans putting Amy Coney Barrett on the Supreme Court is unfair and will turn that Court into a right-wing activist Supreme Court. Nevertheless, wisdom calls for restraint so you don't make the situation worse. Democrats need to remember that Donald Trump with his ignoring the long standing in America customs and legal standards of restraint on Presidential power changed the rules, after Trump a President can now largely do whatever he wants through Executive Order. So let's say on this ACA case currently in the Supreme Court, Judge Barrett is confirmed as a Justice and she gives the Court the additional vote to say the individual mandate is unconstitutional and even goes as far as saying therefore the ACA's whole entire scheme of the individual insurance market with communal pricing based on large enrollee pools is unconstitutional so that as a consequence people with pre-existing conditions would again be subject to insurance underwriting based on their health status in trying to get health insurance which would put the cost of that insurance out of reach for most such Americans. Well what does a President Biden do in this post-Trump world he issues an Executive Order that Medicare has to open up enrollment to Americans with pre-existing conditions unless they are high income American and he also says publicly to American seniors you are not going to pay one dollar out of your Medicare fund for this coverage expansion because I promise I will not sign one budget bill until Congress covers Medicare's monetary loss from this expansion. The bottom line is that Democrats have other options to fight this injustice and its effects other than stacking the Court!

One thing Democrats might want to consider is slightly changing the terms of the Supreme Court by this I mean the following. When one really thinks about it America has a somewhat depraved system for our Supreme Court. The current terms are that a Justice once confirmed to that bench receives a life-time appointment which necessitates the question what has that wrought America. Well in Ruth Bader Ginsburg case it wrought a hundred and seventy-five million Americans continually hoping she would not die during the Trump presidency so he would have the opportunity to choose her replacement. This RBG scenario is not the first of its kind it is often the case where the American people have to pin their hopes on a responsible Supreme Court on a responsible body which is the final arbiter of America's laws on a specific Justice not dying during a specific President's term of office, cannot we do better as a people, cannot we create a better design for the highest Court of our country! How about making the mandatory retirement age of a Supreme Court Justice seventy-two years of age that would be five years past the Social Security full retirement age, ten years past the mandatory retirement age for people in the U.S. army! If there was a mandatory retirement age than the American people would have a bigger say on who gets put on the court because they would know when a President will have a seat to fill and they could factor that in with regard to how they vote in the respective Presidential election - therefore America would be a stronger Democrat country; not to mention Justice Thomas is currently seventy-two years of age and so would have to give up his seat!

Why would you insult imbeciles?

 

[Winston]

Since the Senate has regressed to the "Tyranny of Democracy" to fill the federal bench as well as the Supreme Court with ideologues, I expect the Democrats to use every Constitutional measure to counter the Banana Republicans attack on our once great Republic.

So you actually believe Democrats wouldn't have filled the seat.

You sir, are a total and complete liar. {slap} I slap your face with my glove ...

The last time they had both the Senate and the Presidency the Cloture rule for SC Nominees was still in effect.

In the face of the last 12 years, I expect the winner to do away with the Cloture rule altogether, and we'll see how well the Banana Republicans deal with the Tyranny of Democracy.

Another flat out liar.

Democrats invented the filibuster for judges under W
Democrats ended the filibuster for judges under O
Democrats invented the filibuster for administration appointments under O
Democrats ended the filibuster for administration appointments under O
Democrats changed the voting rules to get Obamacare through despite Scott Brown's appointment to the senate.

Now you present it as if you're somehow the victims of changing filibuster rules when you DID all the changes. You're a complete and utter liar.

You only have one use. Here's a stick, boy, go fetch it, go fetch! That's it, jump up and down, now ... {throws stick, bendog fetches}.

Gooboy, gooboy, gooboy!

Republicans, not Democrats, eliminated the Senate filibuster on Supreme Court nominees

Fact check: Republicans, not Democrats, eliminated the Senate filibuster on Supreme Court nominees

Democrats led by Sen. Harry Reid ended the filibuster for non-SCOTUS nominees, but the GOP under Sen. Mitch McConnell eliminated it for SCOTUS picks.

www.usatoday.com

OK, stupid one.

There was no judicial filibuster before W. Democrats invented it. Then under Obama Democrats eliminated the filibuster for all judicial appointments other than SCOTUS.

That Republicans approved two hard left Obama appointments, so Democrats didn't have to end it.

So there was zero reason they had to leave the selective filibuster Democrats invented one administration ago in place

The first time a judicial filibuster was used was in 1968 when Johnson tried to elevate Fortas to Chief Justice. You do realize Johnson was a democrat, so it was the Republicans that first started the practice. It was done through the cloture motion, which I am quite sure you don't even know what the hell that is.

 

[BULLDOG]

Hillary was supposed to appoint the 5th and final SCOTUS justice who would eliminated the 1st and 2nd Amendment; the 4th died right after 9/11

Instead, Hillary just had her phone records made available online this past week.

It must be difficult for our dear Attorney General to making heads or tails out of that information abyss. There's so much graft there. I pray for this sad time of American justice. May God strengthen those who must deal with the Democrat goal to throw out courtesy and kindness and replace goodness with paranoid distrust. I saw a considerable lot of hatred against the best qualified woman for Supreme Court Justice. I hope the Republicans will just call out the vote yes or no for the candidate. The circus is over. imho.

The right certainly has the votes to approve her, and she will be the next Supreme Court Justice, but the vile tactics used to put her there will be regretted by the right. Just because you have the power to force your will doesn't mean anyone will make it easy for you, or that this debacle will be forgotten any time soon.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

When the Constitution was written everyone had firearms in their homes. Everyone.

Mostly just white males who were also expected to be in the Militias too.

Everyone who eats had a gun in the home.

 

[BlindBoo]

Since the Senate has regressed to the "Tyranny of Democracy" to fill the federal bench as well as the Supreme Court with ideologues, I expect the Democrats to use every Constitutional measure to counter the Banana Republicans attack on our once great Republic.

Man, you have truly OD'd on leftist kool-aid combined with TDS fevah!
You've turned into the shell of the poster that you used to be!
Your cred credit card is used up!!

As the reality of the political landscape dawns on the Banana Republicans, you can bet your ass you're gonna hear the term "Tyranny of Democracy' a lot more from their long yellow snouts.

Or not......might be the donkey's kicking and screaming again......

 

[Winston]

Hillary was supposed to appoint the 5th and final SCOTUS justice who would eliminate the 1st and 2nd Amendment; the 4th died right after 9/11

What the hell are you talking about? That makes no sense at all. Even if someone want to get rid of an amendment, the SCOTUS can not do it unilaterally . Your just spewing hot air

~~~~~~
I'd say that Democrats have tried to destroy the Constitution for more than 150 years. Take for example Dem's were responsible for changing how Senators were appointed. Originally Governors appointed Senators and there was greater turn over. Today Senators are elected and spend years getting re-elected rather than doing the business of government.
Our fore fathers in their wisdom set up the legislature body of government to emulate the House of Lords (Senate) and the House of Commons (Congress). The House of Lords as appointees of the States and Congress elected by the people..

Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Storrs was the first to call for direct vote for senators, he was a Federalist. It was Bristow of Kansas that initiated the action, in the senate, that resulted in the seventeenth amendment. He was a Republican. Why the hell don't you ignorant people do a little googling before spouting off at the mouth, or do you just enjoy revealing to everyone your ignorance?

 

[Indeependent]

Can any Liberal please list the members of the Supreme Count who are not ideologues?

 

[B. Kidd]

Since the Senate has regressed to the "Tyranny of Democracy" to fill the federal bench as well as the Supreme Court with ideologues, I expect the Democrats to use every Constitutional measure to counter the Banana Republicans attack on our once great Republic.

Man, you have truly OD'd on leftist kool-aid combined with TDS fevah!
You've turned into the shell of the poster that you used to be!
Your cred credit card is used up!!

As the reality of the political landscape dawns on the Banana Republicans, you can bet your ass you're gonna hear the term "Tyranny of Democracy' a lot more from their long yellow snouts.

Or not......might be the donkey's kicking and screaming again......

Sounds more like a cow crying...

 

[hadit]

Since the Senate has regressed to the "Tyranny of Democracy" to fill the federal bench as well as the Supreme Court with ideologues, I expect the Democrats to use every Constitutional measure to counter the Banana Republicans attack on our once great Republic.

The tyranny of using their duly assigned authority and powers? How horrible!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

the vile tactics used to put her there will be regretted by the right.

Sounds awful!!!!

Tell me more about these vile tactics.