The Constitution Does Not Decide How Many Sit On The Supreme Court WE do aka our elected officials so it's time to legitimately expand .......

[merrill]

It is necessary to expand so as to become more representative of this nation. It is over due.

Congress routinely changed the number of justices to achieve its own partisan political goals, resulting in as few as five Supreme Court justices required by law under John Adams to as many as 10 under Abraham Lincoln.

The U.S. Constitution is silent about how many justices should sit on the Supreme Court. In fact, the office of Chief Justice only exists because it’s mentioned in the Constitution under Senate rules for impeachment proceedings (“When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside...”).

It’s Congress, not the Constitution, that decides the size of the Supreme Court.

Why Do 9 Justices Serve on the Supreme Court?​

The Constitution doesn't stipulate how many justices should serve on the Court—in fact, that number fluctuated until 1869.

 

[pknopp]

This is no solution. It's odd how many want to add more justices as opposed to run decent candidates that people can support and have them pick new justices.

If we have 51 justices and presidents you don't support pick 28 of them, the end results are still the same.

 

[1srelluc]

So you keep adding till you get the make-up you want at a given time?

Do you know, or care, how childish that sounds?

 

[merrill]

It is necessary to expand so as to become more representative of this nation. It is over due.

Congress routinely changed the number of justices to achieve its own partisan political goals, resulting in as few as five Supreme Court justices required by law under John Adams to as many as 10 under Abraham Lincoln.

The U.S. Constitution is silent about how many justices should sit on the Supreme Court. In fact, the office of Chief Justice only exists because it’s mentioned in the Constitution under Senate rules for impeachment proceedings (“When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside...”).

It’s Congress, not the Constitution, that decides the size of the Supreme Court.

Why Do 9 Justices Serve on the Supreme Court?​

The Constitution doesn't stipulate how many justices should serve on the Court—in fact, that number fluctuated until 1869.

adding more at this time in history is practical and responsible.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Yes. Twelve with a twelve year term with one rolling off every year.

 

[pknopp]

Yes. Twelve with a twelve year term with one rolling off every year.

We would have the benefit of nothing else getting done as Congress would be fighting over the confirmation of judges all year, every year.

No, I still support the idea of running decent candidates.

 

[Meister]

Yes. Twelve with a twelve year term with one rolling off every year.

Not sure how that would work with a president having a possible 8 year run.

 

[Rambunctious]

It is necessary to expand so as to become more representative of this nation. It is over due.

Congress routinely changed the number of justices to achieve its own partisan political goals, resulting in as few as five Supreme Court justices required by law under John Adams to as many as 10 under Abraham Lincoln.

The U.S. Constitution is silent about how many justices should sit on the Supreme Court. In fact, the office of Chief Justice only exists because it’s mentioned in the Constitution under Senate rules for impeachment proceedings (“When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside...”).

It’s Congress, not the Constitution, that decides the size of the Supreme Court.

Why Do 9 Justices Serve on the Supreme Court?​

The Constitution doesn't stipulate how many justices should serve on the Court—in fact, that number fluctuated until 1869.

Go ahead... just in time for the GOP to take over and appoint them... The DNC doesn't have enough time to get appointments confirmed.... We will filibuster your ass off....

 

[Zincwarrior]

Not sure how that would work with a president having a possible 8 year run.

It's not dependent on the President. Each has a twelve year term, staggered with each other.

 

[johngaltshrugged]

It is necessary to expand so as to become more representative of this nation. It is over due.

Congress routinely changed the number of justices to achieve its own partisan political goals, resulting in as few as five Supreme Court justices required by law under John Adams to as many as 10 under Abraham Lincoln.

The U.S. Constitution is silent about how many justices should sit on the Supreme Court. In fact, the office of Chief Justice only exists because it’s mentioned in the Constitution under Senate rules for impeachment proceedings (“When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside...”).

It’s Congress, not the Constitution, that decides the size of the Supreme Court.

Why Do 9 Justices Serve on the Supreme Court?​

The Constitution doesn't stipulate how many justices should serve on the Court—in fact, that number fluctuated until 1869.

It may not be set at 9 in law but it has been the same number for 153 years, since 1869.
Changing the numbers now because you didn't win the game a few times is childish.
There is nothing to say we can't have fewer. John Adams had only 5.
I say we get rid of Roberts & the new affirmative action hire & go with 7.
Deal?

 

[okfine]

We would have the benefit of nothing else getting done as Congress would be fighting over the confirmation of judges all year, every year.

No, I still support the idea of running decent candidates.

"fighting over the confirmation"

They do that now.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

It is necessary to expand so as to become more representative of this nation. It is over due.

Congress routinely changed the number of justices to achieve its own partisan political goals, resulting in as few as five Supreme Court justices required by law under John Adams to as many as 10 under Abraham Lincoln.

The U.S. Constitution is silent about how many justices should sit on the Supreme Court. In fact, the office of Chief Justice only exists because it’s mentioned in the Constitution under Senate rules for impeachment proceedings (“When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside...”).

It’s Congress, not the Constitution, that decides the size of the Supreme Court.

Why Do 9 Justices Serve on the Supreme Court?​

The Constitution doesn't stipulate how many justices should serve on the Court—in fact, that number fluctuated until 1869.

So where do you draw the line loser?

 

[night_son]

It is necessary to expand so as to become more representative of this nation. It is over due.

Congress routinely changed the number of justices to achieve its own partisan political goals, resulting in as few as five Supreme Court justices required by law under John Adams to as many as 10 under Abraham Lincoln.

The U.S. Constitution is silent about how many justices should sit on the Supreme Court. In fact, the office of Chief Justice only exists because it’s mentioned in the Constitution under Senate rules for impeachment proceedings (“When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside...”).

It’s Congress, not the Constitution, that decides the size of the Supreme Court.

Why Do 9 Justices Serve on the Supreme Court?​

The Constitution doesn't stipulate how many justices should serve on the Court—in fact, that number fluctuated until 1869.

The majority of Americans do not want to murder their unborn children. The majority of Americans do not want their children mutilated into sexless things. The majority of Americans DO want unregulated rights to defend themselves and their families. I would say our current spread of Supreme Court justices represents the American majority quite well. The only change I'd like to see is at least one more conservative judge appointed to the SC. You want civil war 2.0? Keep pushing, keep stretching our rubber band of tolerance.

 

[Esdraelon]

So you keep adding till you get the make-up you want at a given time?

Do you know, or care, how childish that sounds?

I think they're all about "striking back" over a decision they disagree with and have no time or desire to look at the potential consequences. Just like Harry Reid did when he chose the "nuclear option" so that Obama's Federal judges could get a rubber stamp. Packing the court will backfire as well. At some point, it will become so ridiculously politicized that the judicial branch will fall and so will the nation.

 

[pknopp]

"fighting over the confirmation"

They do that now.

Right but not every year as proposed.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

No…

As pknopp wrote run better candidates that will select better people to sit on the High Court like Reagan did when he was President…

 

[pknopp]

The majority of Americans do not want to murder their unborn children. The majority of Americans do not want their children mutilated into sexless things. The majority of Americans DO want unregulated rights to defend themselves and their families. I would say our current spread of Supreme Court justices represents the American majority quite well. The only change I'd like to see is at least one more conservative judge appointed to the SC. You want civil war 2.0? Keep pushing, keep stretching our rubber band of tolerance.

To note, it can then be argued that the "Majority of American's do not want asylum seekers to have to stay in Mexico".

 

[Meister]

It's not dependent on the President. Each has a twelve year term, staggered with each other.

The president nominates them...1 a year for 8 years.

 

[JGalt]

It is necessary to expand so as to become more representative of this nation. It is over due.

Congress routinely changed the number of justices to achieve its own partisan political goals, resulting in as few as five Supreme Court justices required by law under John Adams to as many as 10 under Abraham Lincoln.

The U.S. Constitution is silent about how many justices should sit on the Supreme Court. In fact, the office of Chief Justice only exists because it’s mentioned in the Constitution under Senate rules for impeachment proceedings (“When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside...”).

It’s Congress, not the Constitution, that decides the size of the Supreme Court.

Why Do 9 Justices Serve on the Supreme Court?​

The Constitution doesn't stipulate how many justices should serve on the Court—in fact, that number fluctuated until 1869.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

adding more at this time in history is practical and responsible.

Why?