Time to increase the number of Supreme Court Justices

[rightwinger]

Great idea!

Kill the fillibuster while Democrats can then they'll have nothing to ***** about when the tool they have handed Republicans for 2024 is used to slaughter their "murder America" drive!

I am not worried by your threat

It will not come into play unless Republicans win the White House, Senate and House

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Time to increase the number of Supreme Court Justices

No, it’s time for Democrats to realize that the courts will no longer defend citizens’ rights and protected liberties from attack by the authoritarian right.

For decades Democrats have successfully used to courts to combat rightwing racism, bigotry, and hate.

Democrats must now engage in the same partisan activism as Republicans – to use the political process to combat rightwing racism, bigotry, and hate the courts now support and defend.

 

[Jarlaxle]

You're like clockwork, aren't you?

He's as predictable-and as useful-as a broken clock.

This is just an opening salvo for Republicans

It is now obvious that the TRUMPCourt is at their service to rubber stamp any laws that restrict personal freedoms and support unrestricted Corporate Power

Republicans will now move to a nationwide ban on abortions
Look for Republicans to revoke Gay Marriage rights
Look for an expansion of gun access
Look for diminished worker protections
Look for elimination of environmental regulations

Time to end the TRUMPCourt
Expand the number of Justices

This is a fever dream.

 

[TheParser]

Heck!

Forget about packing the Court.

Let's just abolish it.

All judicial decisions can be left to the Democratic National Committee.

And perchance the DNC cannot agree, the final decision would be made by three thoroughly impartial ladies: Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, and Dr. Jill Biden.

 

[BS Filter]

Same with a lot of things the founders never envisioned

Yeah, like electric light, air conditioning, cars, planes, trains, telephones, indoor plumbing...The Founders never said you could have it...

 

[Pellinore]

Think, RW.

If the libs were to try to add 4 new lib justices on to the Supreme Court, when Trump returns to power what do you think he will do? I'll tell you what- add 6 new American justices to flip the court again.

This doesn't have the end you think it will have.

That's a terrible argument, for several reasons.

First of all, it fails as a slippery slope logical fallacy. It is self-defeating to discard one possible action because of a second more extreme possible action that might or might not happen in the future. If the second event happens, it can be re-debated then.

Second, there have been times in our past when there was no set number of Justices, and it didn't happen then.

Third, I didn't hear anyone complain when the GOP locked the Court at eight for more than a year.

Fourth, the most common justification that I've seen is to increase the size of the Court to 13 to match the number of Federal Districts. If Congress does that, a further extension cannot be argued on the same grounds.

Fifth, it completely cuts out possibilities for "Add 4 seats, then fill one every two years until they're all filled," which could certainly be a compromise position in order to help it pass.

 

[rightwinger]

The TRUMPCourt has shown a complete disregard for judicial precedents

Time to fix it

 

[Oldestyle]

I was willing to take a wait and see position on the TRUMPCourt

They said they would honor Judicial precedence and not legislate from the Bench.
I expected a Conservative court but a court that would not run roughshod over individual rights

Completely discarding Roe v Wade, eroding Miranda protections, restricting states from regulating gun possession all run contrary to the Will of We the People.

Democrats have six months to abandon the Senate Filibuster and legally change the number of Supreme Court Justices

You never were that bright, Winger! You have six months because you KNOW the Democrats are about to get their asses handed to them in the mid-terms! Yet you have the nerve to declare that the Supreme Court is going against the "Will of We the People"? Be honest for a change...admit that the will of the people is going against the liberal agenda you on the left have been pushing! You want to pack the Supreme Court NOW because you know you're about to lose power in the Legislative Branch and think you can keep your power by legislating from a Supreme Court that you've politicized.

 

[AZrailwhale]

I was willing to take a wait and see position on the TRUMPCourt

They said they would honor Judicial precedence and not legislate from the Bench.
I expected a Conservative court but a court that would not run roughshod over individual rights

Completely discarding Roe v Wade, eroding Miranda protections, restricting states from regulating gun possession all run contrary to the Will of We the People.

Democrats have six months to abandon the Senate Filibuster and legally change the number of Supreme Court Justices

So because SCOTUS won't rule the way YOU want them to, you want to change the rules of the game. Conservatives put up with SCOTUS making decisions that WE didn't agree with for almost a hundred years without changing the rules. The Will of the People means absolutely nothing to the law. Laws have to be Constitutional.

 

[AZrailwhale]

The TRUMPCourt has shown a complete disregard for judicial precedents

Time to fix it

SCOTUS sets precedent and precedent can aways be changed. Otherwise schools would still be segregated. SCOTUS has reversed many precedents over the years.

 

[rightwinger]

SCOTUS sets precedent and precedent can aways be changed. Otherwise schools would still be segregated. SCOTUS has reversed many precedents over the years.

Not what our Conservative Justices claimed when they were affirmed

 

[rightwinger]

So because SCOTUS won't rule the way YOU want them to, you want to change the rules of the game. Conservatives put up with SCOTUS making decisions that WE didn't agree with for almost a hundred years without changing the rules. The Will of the People means absolutely nothing to the law. Laws have to be Constitutional.

SCOTUS laid low till they had the votes

In the meantime they claimed to support the decisions of previous courts

 

[hadit]

I am willing to wait for Republicans to win the WH, Senate and House

Until that time, Republicans can’t overrule

You might have a little over 2 years to enjoy your tantrum.

 

[rightwinger]

You never were that bright, Winger! You have six months because you KNOW the Democrats are about to get their asses handed to them in the mid-terms! Yet you have the nerve to declare that the Supreme Court is going against the "Will of We the People"? Be honest for a change...admit that the will of the people is going against the liberal agenda you on the left have been pushing! You want to pack the Supreme Court NOW because you know you're about to lose power in the Legislative Branch and think you can keep your power by legislating from a Supreme Court that you've politicized.

Very true

Let’s get it done

 

[rightwinger]

You might have a little over 2 years to enjoy your tantrum.

When you actually do it I will worry about it

 

[Seymour Flops]

I was willing to take a wait and see position on the TRUMPCourt

They said they would honor Judicial precedence and not legislate from the Bench.
I expected a Conservative court but a court that would not run roughshod over individual rights

Completely discarding Roe v Wade, eroding Miranda protections, restricting states from regulating gun possession all run contrary to the Will of We the People.

The first two examples are overturning or modifying past court cases, not overturning laws passed by the will of we the people.

The third, rules that an enumerated right in the constitution takes precedent over state laws. Ironic that you object to that when Roe v. Wade said that a non-enumerated right that the court inferred and interpreted, took precedent over state laws.

Democrats have six months to abandon the Senate Filibuster and legally change the number of Supreme Court Justices

Pretty crazy precedent for them to set just prior to an election in which they will almost certainly lose control of both houses, and two years from an election that will see either Trump or DiSantis take the White House. Suppose they add six justices, expecting to transform the court into a majority radical left. What will prevent the 2024 congress from adding sixteen, expecting to re-transform the court into radical Trumpers?

 

[hadit]

When you actually do it I will worry about it

I have nothing to do with it, but they won't be doing it if the democrats remain sane enough to leave the Court alone.

 

[hadit]

The first two examples are overturning or modifying past court cases, not overturning laws passed by the will of we the people.

The third, rules that an enumerated right in the constitution takes precedent over state laws. Ironic that you object to that when Roe v. Wade said that a non-enumerated right that the court inferred and interpreted, took precedent over state laws.

Pretty crazy precedent for them to set just prior to an election in which they will almost certainly lose control of both houses, and two years from an election that will see either Trump or DiSantis take the White House. Suppose they add six justices, expecting to transform the court into a majority radical left. What will prevent the 2024 congress from adding sixteen, expecting to re-transform the court into radical Trumpers?

Absolutely nothing, and is probably the single biggest thing holding them back. It's not like they care for the independence of the Court.

 

[rightwinger]

I have nothing to do with it, but they won't be doing it if the democrats remain sane enough to leave the Court alone.

The Court needs to be fixed

 

[hadit]

The Court needs to be fixed

It's fine. You just don't like the decisions they're making right now.