Who here favors expanding the Supreme Court?

[rightwinger]

Our founders envisioned a Court System that was outside of political pressure.

That is no longer the case. If Democrats can get away with expanding the courts.....that’s the way it is

No form of gov't can survive when immoral men run it............The Founding Fathers put these checks on gov't power for a reason.......to make it difficult to gain too much power............the courts were a part of those checks.............

Now........political ideology ......not the rule of law gets selected.......instead of a compromise justice that both parties can agree on.............but both parties are corrupt now............

To the Abyss we go.

Checks and balances are gone
Courts are no longer immune from politics.

Anything goes. If Dems want to expand the courts you can either stop them or bitch about it on message boards

 

[rightwinger]

If RBG dies and McConnell rushes an appointment before the election in contradiction of the excuse he used in 2016 the first order of business should be to add two more justices.

Waiting to see what would happen if she dies after Trump has lost the election and Republicans lose the Senate.

I can see Republicans rushing a confirmation in 60 days in a lame duck Congress.

If it happens.......anything goes

 

[eagle1462010]

Our founders envisioned a Court System that was outside of political pressure.

That is no longer the case. If Democrats can get away with expanding the courts.....that’s the way it is

No form of gov't can survive when immoral men run it............The Founding Fathers put these checks on gov't power for a reason.......to make it difficult to gain too much power............the courts were a part of those checks.............

Now........political ideology ......not the rule of law gets selected.......instead of a compromise justice that both parties can agree on.............but both parties are corrupt now............

To the Abyss we go.

Checks and balances are gone
Courts are no longer immune from politics.

Anything goes. If Dems want to expand the courts you can either stop them or bitch about it on message boards

Your side lost so you now change the rules..............and your last post just STATED THE DNC POSITION ON EVERYTHING.

Do what we say OR ELSE..........we already knew that was your policy.............need 60 million from our side to say to 60 million from you side to say We choose ELSE............and get it over with......

Of course your side will have 30 million illegals hauling ass to come back later from the onset...............Because ILLEGALS REALLY DON'T LIKE YOU........they only want more to come here...........they think you are assholes just like we do.

 

[eagle1462010]

If RBG dies and McConnell rushes an appointment before the election in contradiction of the excuse he used in 2016 the first order of business should be to add two more justices.

Waiting to see what would happen if she dies after Trump has lost the election and Republicans lose the Senate.

I can see Republicans rushing a confirmation in 60 days in a lame duck Congress.

If it happens.......anything goes

Confirmed in the Senate quickly ......while your side tries to reopen the fillabuster.........to later say you can't do that......to wash, rinse, spin, dry.....and repeat.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Our founders envisioned a Court System that was outside of political pressure.

That is no longer the case. If Democrats can get away with expanding the courts.....that’s the way it is

So Trump should appoint 4 new Justices today, right?

 

[rightwinger]

the Biden Plan.

Now the Biden Plan is to Stack the Courts
Whatever works, that is our new court system

The court system didn't change, jackass.

Obama didn't get to have Justice Garland because the senate didn't confirm him. That is according to the rules laid out in the constitution. The senate exercising their legal prerogative to confirm or deny, and Trump exercising his legal prerogative to nominate justices for empty seats. The fact that you don't like the outcome doesn't mean that the senate broke any rules, and it doesn't mean that Trump "stacked the courts" by nominating justices, AS IS HIS FUCKING CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY!

No, all you progressives are doing is trying to imply that some rule or law was broken, to justify doing what you always do: Change the rules every time they don't result in your victory.

Denying Garland even a hearing established a new way of doing business. No law was broken, Republicans did it because they could.

There is no law saying Congress can’t expand the court to 11 judges. If the Dems do it, what do you have to bitch about?

 

[gipper]

Our founders envisioned a Court System that was outside of political pressure.

That is no longer the case. If Democrats can get away with expanding the courts.....that’s the way it is

No form of gov't can survive when immoral men run it............The Founding Fathers put these checks on gov't power for a reason.......to make it difficult to gain too much power............the courts were a part of those checks.............

Now........political ideology ......not the rule of law gets selected.......instead of a compromise justice that both parties can agree on.............but both parties are corrupt now............

To the Abyss we go.

Checks and balances are gone
Courts are no longer immune from politics.

Anything goes. If Dems want to expand the courts you can either stop them or bitch about it on message boards

The SC is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the ruling class. It has ignored the Bill of Rights for many decades.

Time to eliminate it and the entire federal government, and start anew.

 

[CowboyTed]

The courts are now a political toy.

Do whatever you can get away with. Stack the courts. Block appointments. Hold seats open until you have a favorable Presidency. Nuclear option appointments

Agreed. But do you favor the democrats packing the courts to get their way on things?

Yes or no?

And what have the GOP been doing for the last 4 years?

How about all the judges resign and get reappointed as per election popular vote percentage (this is not happening)

At this moment time the Supreme Court are Conservative biased while the people have voted in popular votes for Democrats in both houses and the US presidential election.

 

[JoeB131]

So who here agrees with it?

The reasoning in the article was this:

“We can’t go on like this where every time there’s a vacancy, there’s this apocalyptic ideological battle,” he added.

But how would the ideological battle change with more Supreme Court justices? It makes not sense. Essentially, the battles would rage even more as more and more would need to be appointed.

This is a unique situation because Trump was an illegitimate President who got two appointments he didn't deserve...

Of course, we could just wait for Uncle Thomas to retire, and then it will be 5-4 liberals (assuming that Ginsburg survives long enough to get Trump out of office.)

I do think we should do additional reforms. When the Constitution was written, nobody thought we'd have a court with 2/3rds of its members past retirement age.

So we should limit these guys to a 20 year term, with forced retirements of one a year until we get everyone under 20 years. (That means, force the retirements of Uncle Thomas in 2021, Ginsburg in 2022, Bryer in 2023, before we have Roberts retire in 2025, and then everyone else, 20 years after they were first appointed.

We should also require a 2/3rd majority in the Senate to appoint a Supreme Court Justice so we don't get hyper-partisans.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

If RBG dies and McConnell rushes an appointment before the election in contradiction of the excuse he used in 2016 the first order of business should be to add two more justices.

Yeah, if a republican senate and a republican president use their numerical majorities to CONSTITUTIONALLY appoint another supreme court justice, the fact that McConnell said what he said about appointments in election years TOTALLY justifies responding by breaking the constitution to take control of the court.

Because apparently, an action which is totally legal but explained by bullshit is the EXACT EQUIVALENT of ignoring the law altogether and literally cheating. "I don't like what you say, therefore I shouldn't be bound by the same rules." Nothing unreasonable, insanely entitled, or blindly narcissistic about that sentiment at all!

 

[rightwinger]

If RBG dies and McConnell rushes an appointment before the election in contradiction of the excuse he used in 2016 the first order of business should be to add two more justices.

Waiting to see what would happen if she dies after Trump has lost the election and Republicans lose the Senate.

I can see Republicans rushing a confirmation in 60 days in a lame duck Congress.

If it happens.......anything goes

Confirmed in the Senate quickly ......while your side tries to reopen the fillabuster.........to later say you can't do that......to wash, rinse, spin, dry.....and repeat.

If the Republicans can do it after blocking Garland, let them do it.
If Dems can expand the Courts. Let them do it.

All is fair

 

[rightwinger]

Packing the courts is when you ADD seats to skirt past the rules for your political takeover.

What rules prevent you from packing the court?
Senate can make new rules.

There are only precedents. Precedents like the right to filibuster, allowing a President to fill vacancies, not leaving seats vacant

 

[occupied]

If RBG dies and McConnell rushes an appointment before the election in contradiction of the excuse he used in 2016 the first order of business should be to add two more justices.

Waiting to see what would happen if she dies after Trump has lost the election and Republicans lose the Senate.

I can see Republicans rushing a confirmation in 60 days in a lame duck Congress.

If it happens.......anything goes

Exactly. Hopefully democrats are finally getting the message that we need them to fight for democracy with the same zeal of republicans that are trying to destroy it.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The courts are now a political toy.

Do whatever you can get away with. Stack the courts. Block appointments. Hold seats open until you have a favorable Presidency. Nuclear option appointments

Agreed. But do you favor the democrats packing the courts to get their way on things?

Yes or no?

Personally, I do not favor Democrats in any form, in any position.

 

[eagle1462010]

Our founders envisioned a Court System that was outside of political pressure.

That is no longer the case. If Democrats can get away with expanding the courts.....that’s the way it is

So Trump should appoint 4 new Justices today, right?

I say 100 right now..............that is basically what that asshole just said.........whatever it takes to gain power.

POWER........Career politicians so obsessed with it...........that they would stay in office rather than retire and enjoy life..........fishing.......anything but being in the ......I'VE GOT POWER CLUB.........Maybe it's like the MAFIA........AND IT IS........that you CAN NEVER LEAVE once you've JOINED THE CLUB.........what our politicians do today make Al Capone look like a sissy.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Progressives need to be relocated to a country more to their liking, China? North Korea?

We are on the brink of genuine Civil War

 

[eagle1462010]

The courts are now a political toy.

Do whatever you can get away with. Stack the courts. Block appointments. Hold seats open until you have a favorable Presidency. Nuclear option appointments

Agreed. But do you favor the democrats packing the courts to get their way on things?

Yes or no?

Personally, I do not favor Democrats in any form, in any position.

 

[rightwinger]

If RBG dies and McConnell rushes an appointment before the election in contradiction of the excuse he used in 2016 the first order of business should be to add two more justices.

Waiting to see what would happen if she dies after Trump has lost the election and Republicans lose the Senate.

I can see Republicans rushing a confirmation in 60 days in a lame duck Congress.

If it happens.......anything goes

Exactly. Hopefully democrats are finally getting the message that we need them to fight for democracy with the same zeal republicans that are trying to destroy it.

If Dems can pack the courts, why shouldn’t they do it?
What do they have to lose?

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Packing the courts is when you ADD seats to skirt past the rules for your political takeover.

What rules prevent you from packing the court?
Senate can make new rules.

There are only precedents. Precedents like the right to filibuster, allowing a President to fill vacancies, not leaving seats vacant

Actually, you've got a point there. I realized after I posted that I can't actually name the rule that prevents this, and in looking it up 9 is a number that's only been since the 1860's. I stand corrected there.

Nevertheless, the idea that taking a sledge to the coequality of the branches of government is a proportionate response to the fact that you didn't control the senate when it would have allowed a democrat president to fill a previously conservative supreme court seat? Still narcissistic as shit.

You all cheered when Obama reminded conservatives that "elections have consequences". Yet as soon as YOU don't like the consequences, you turn the game board over and scatter the checkers all over the floor.

 

[eagle1462010]

Denying Garland even a hearing established a new way of doing business. No law was broken, Republicans did it because they could.

The Senate shall confirm............they would never have confirmed that one...........

If the Senate wasn't now voted on by popular vote...........your side wouldn't have a pot to piss in............a major change in a time of Chaos caused that.................The Senate was supposed to be the voice of the State Legislature...........this one Amendment fucked the Constitution more than anything else in our history..........

Had that never happened........you would have been forced to not be pricks to win locals over all over the nation..........and not JUST POPULATION HIVES.