General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNOW SHOULD WE PACK THE COURT?
Would it be possible to start the process if a few repubs walked away from the House? Biden should be fuming right now. NO MORE MR NICE GUY! We are in trouble.
TexasDem69
(1,850 posts)That changed the analysis? And the answer is no, we should not
Tribetime
(4,711 posts)Bending over backwards to make any argument they could in Trump's favor.. Clearly The Supreme Court justices, some of them are.As corrupt as sin
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)... that's how screwed up SCOTUS is now
C_U_L8R
(45,021 posts)then do it. Just so they know.
sdfernando
(4,947 posts)I think a good term would be rebalancing the court. Having a Justice for each court makes sense.
Earth-shine
(4,044 posts)Poiuyt
(18,130 posts)But the court should definitely be expanded.
In It to Win It
(8,293 posts)Congress should have expanded the all federal courts at least 10 years ago. Congress should assess the needs of the judiciary every 10 to 20 years.
Judges are seen as political operatives in robes so that will likely not happen.
brooklynite
(94,757 posts)Earthrise
(15,535 posts)To the 2020 election. Now I think doing so is urgent.
wnylib
(21,645 posts)but now see it as imperative.
Groundhawg
(560 posts)wnylib
(21,645 posts)It WILL be possible if we give Biden a securely Democratic Cobgress in this year's election.
Polybius
(15,506 posts)At best we have 50 Senate seats next year.
Groundhawg
(560 posts)wnylib
(21,645 posts)Considering the irrationality and corruption of the current court, Biden might be persuaded to change his view.
Groundhawg
(560 posts)And why should we convince Biden to go against his wishes? I get it the court is corrupt but there is nothing currently we can do about it.
wnylib
(21,645 posts)I began by saying that we might be able to something when we have a strong enough Dem majority.
If we get that in the coming election, why shouldn't we try to persuade Biden to approve a law that expands the court?
Groundhawg
(560 posts)wnylib
(21,645 posts)But, he is not God. Come to think of it, people do try to persuade God to do certain things, so trying to persuade a good president to do something is not radical. It's politics, which Joe is quite experienced at.
I am not suggesting making it a campaign issue this year. I'm only suggesting that, if we hold all 3 seats of government in November, we should consider court expansion to match the federal district courts.
Groundhawg
(560 posts)iemanja
(53,074 posts)The question is how?
TexasDem69
(1,850 posts)That would still be 6-5 against us. Or should we add four? That seems pretty convenient since it would give us a majority. But what if one wasnt particularly liberal, do we then need to add six? And we better do it fast, because who knows what the government will look like in February
haele
(12,682 posts)That better balances the case loads then 9 judges splitting 13 districts between them.
It makes more sense to add or remove justices as judicial districts are added or consolidated.
Haele
calimary
(81,521 posts)Cheezoholic
(2,041 posts)are the gateway to the SCOTUS and arguably have more influence over the general population on a day to day basis than the SCOTUS. I have been a proponent of 1 Supervising Justice per Appeals Circuit long before RICO.
calimary
(81,521 posts)Thanks for the adjustment.
Silent3
(15,291 posts)...on an emergency basis.
And I do consider this a five-alarm Constitutional emergency.
brooklynite
(94,757 posts)...not do you have a President who will do so.
Iwasthere
(3,171 posts)Warranting a fresh look, by President Biden. If enough fed up repubs left the house we might just have enough Democrats. At what point do you suggest we act re the clearly mad SC?
LeftInTX
(25,593 posts)mzmolly
(51,007 posts)eom
niyad
(113,595 posts)Trueblue1968
(17,240 posts)Zilli
(190 posts)These sadists could gleefully destroy everything about the country we grew up in and our national integrity, ethics, honor and freedom will be gone and the voice of the people will be silenced. This is a travesty.
A) It looks bad in an election year.
B) It would not overcome a filibuster in the Senate, and Manchin and Sinema would not be on board anyway.
dalton99a
(81,635 posts)Add enough judges to make the assholes permanently irrelevant