Discussion in 'Current Events' started by MolonLabe2009, Aug 13, 2019.
yep, and dems wont be cheating either, they will be following the Moscow Mitch rule
The Rs under Mitch McConnell have already packed the court for political benefit, by refusing to consider Merrick Garland. What McConnell and the Senate Rs did was a disgraceful abdication of their constitutional role. Putting politics above all else.
While I disagree with it, the Constitution says nothing about the composition of the Supreme court, so it's not criminal nor an insurrection to suggest changing the number. It's unethical to threaten the court, but ethics aren't really a thing in Washington anymore. They haven't been in quite some time.
It's not cheating. They used their power. The dems would have done the same in the same situation.
Act of congress changes the number. Simple majority from both houses and a signature from the president is all it takes.
Isn't Congress on recess currently?
It's called the Biden Rule. I believe no SCOTUS candidate has been voted on in a POTUS election year for something like 80 years. In a 1992 speech by Biden, he argued that President Bush should wait until after the election to appoint a replacement if a Supreme Court seat became vacant during the summer or should appoint a moderate acceptable to the then-Democratic Senate, as a precedent.
Sounds like a Great Plan.
Hopefully, in 2020, The Dems Retain the House, Win Back The Senate and Presidency--THEN, Eliminate the filibuster and pack the Court...
Win/Win/Win/Win all the way around.
What's not to love?
Can you name any other SCOTUS nominee that was BLOCKED from being confirmed during an election year? It's one thing to say none has been confirmed. That could be just a matter of timing. Garland was blocked. And McConnell has now said he would go ahead and confirm a SCOTUS pick in an election year if Trump had the chance to make the pick.
So entirely political. Disgraceful.
The Republicans didn't cheat. Stop making crap up.
yes they most certainly did
they changed the rules for sc picks, but don't worry, dems will return the favor
Maybe post the whole quote and the context?
But y'know, never let a spin go unspun. Also, this was part of them introducing a constitutional amendment. Y'know, the very opposite of what Fox was suggesting they were going to do.
So what are you saying? That it is evil when Republicans play politics, but it is righteous when the democrats do it?
The Democrats cheated first.
In 2013, the Democrats triggered the Nuclear option which changed the rules so that lower court and Cabinet nominees could be confirmed with a simple majority, rather than the typical 60-vote threshold.
Then the Republicans expanded the Democrat initiated Nuclear option to also include higher court confirmations.
Now you're pissed and want the Democrats to double down on what they started???
Put the blame where it began and it began with the Democrats!!!!!!
How does "before the public demands it be" change anything?
That's not a fricking factual statement. That's his fricking opinion.
He thinks the American people are on his side and there is no evidence that that is true.
yep, and the poll was of lib progs (biased to fit the agenda)
Thank you for the answer.
So then, couldn't Trump address it proactively? Or better yet, they could pass a law preventing either side from doing such a thing? Maybe a law saying that any changes to the number couldn't go into effect until the next President, so no sitting President could ever try packing the court?
I think it's pretty common knowledge on here that I'm an Independent. I hate today's extreme partisanship and the politicization of every damn thing, but the Supreme Court especially should not be politicized, which is exactly what this talk from the Democrats seems to be encouraging.
I would think action from congress to prevent politicization and packing of the court would have appeal from people on both sides, and would be especially appealing to moderate middle-of-the-road folks like myself.
I would think only the most extreme of extremists would come out fighting to politicize and pack the court. Even Biden and Ginsberg are opposed.
In contrast, I think the reasonable people can see the Pandora's Box it would open, to so flagrantly pack the court for politicization.
I am saying republicans stole the SC by changing the rules, and the dems will take it back by changing the rules - fair is fair
democrats did not steal the SC, that is all on Republicans
yes, it was wrong of dems to change the rules for regular court picks, but republicans also benefited from that rule change too, I condemned dems at that time too
stealing the SC is the worst thing republicans could of done as now no one trusts the SC
now the SC will belong to the party in power going forward
Republicans didn't steal a SC seat.
It was within their power to refuse to confirm a seat in Obama's last year.
"To keep politics out of the court, we are going to pack it with activist leftists"
Did you think they were going to lie down after what y’all pulled with Obama, the retaliation is coming and it’s going to set dangerous precedent. The gerrymandering, voter disenfranchisement, court packing, ignoring of norms and ethics... all have started a disastrous chain reaction.
Did you really think your “team” would have control forever? Jesus so short sighted.
And you people do not understand the meaning of the word coup if you think what was done was one.
And it’s within the power of congress to elect as many SCOTUS justices as they see fit. Yet here y’all are, whining.
Just because they can do something doesn’t mean they should, but y’all were laughing and applauding the last event.
Ever heard the saying “what goes around comes around”?
It's how they did it. The unusual warning was delivered as part of a brief filed Monday in a case related to a New York City gun law by Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.
The Democratic senators' brief was filed in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. City of New York, which dealt with legal limitations on where gun owners could transport their licensed, locked, and unloaded firearms. They are urging the court to stay out of the case brought by the NRA-backed group, claiming that because the city recently changed the law to ease restrictions, the push to the Supreme Court is part of an "industrial-strength influence campaign" to get the conservative majority to rule in favor of gun owners.
If the court still decides to hear the case, a ruling against New York City could prevent other cities and states from passing similar gun control laws.
Their threats were pretty lame but could be seen as attempted extortion. They flat out told SCOTUS not to hear the case or else. This case is already underway so it could be argued that the senators were tampering. I'm sure the defense will object. It will be interesting to see what the circuit court does.
Court packing is not a popular topic with SCOTUS. Liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has also spoken out against court-packing, telling NPR in July, "Nine seems to be a good number." They see Justice Roberts as weak though and one who will cave to their demands. This time it might just piss him off instead.
If nothing becomes of this I will be surprised.
Separate names with a comma.