Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > The Constitution & The Judicial Branch
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

The Constitution & The Judicial Branch Discuss The size of the Supreme Court at the Political Forums; Originally Posted by pjohns This is why I have him on "Ignore": I am quite happy to disagree with someone, ...

Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51 (permalink)  
Old 04-06-2019, 10:51 AM
Jeerleader's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Upper Bucks County, PA
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,155
Thanks: 1,067
Thanked 1,649 Times in 759 Posts
Default Re: The size of the Supreme Court

Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
This is why I have him on "Ignore": I am quite happy to disagree with someone, and debate the matter at hand. But if the point in question regularly devolves into mudslinging, that is quite another matter.
This X1000% . . .

There is no reason to subject oneself to such juvenile antics.

I just wish that those who take his bait would stop quoting him.

Go ahead and hit "Quote" but snip the BS. If someone really wants to read what inspired the reply they can hit the jump back button.
You can’t truly call yourself “peaceful” unless you are capable of great violence.
If you are incapable of violence, you are not peaceful, you are just harmless.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jeerleader For This Useful Post:
  #52 (permalink)  
Old 04-29-2019, 09:35 AM
jamesrage's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: A place where common sense still exist.
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,716
Thanks: 1,637
Thanked 1,736 Times in 1,066 Posts
Default Re: The size of the Supreme Court

Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
Some Democrats are now suggesting that a future Democratic president should pack the Supreme Court with 15 justices. And since the US Constitution does not set a specific number, this change would be theoretically possible.

As an aside, it is rather reminiscent of FDR's court-packing scheme of more than 80 years ago--which was quickly shot down.

There are, of course, some interesting twists here: some have proposed that there should be 10 justices (of the proposed 15) nominated in the old-fashioned way, with the remaining five nominated by unanimous agreement of the other 10 justices.

Others have proposed that there should be rotating SCOTUS justices, taken from the subordinate federal courts; no lifetime appointments.

The bottom line, however, is that all these schemes are designed to counteract the current rightward turn of the High Court.

Ironically, it is precisely when there is a Democratic president--which there will be again, some day--that these "reforms" will be the least useful to Democrats.

I remember when justice Roberts said there were no Obama or Trump judges and liberals praised him for saying that. Roberts was wrong because we all know judges make decisions based on their own political beliefs and thats why there is this huge fight for who gets picked to be a supreme court justice.
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt
Reply With Quote

court, size, supreme, the

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:55 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0