Democrats are threatening to expand the size of the Supreme Court

[rayg]

Democrats Threaten To Pack Court If Republicans Vote On Ginsburg Replacement This Year by expanding the size of the Supreme Court to cancel out President Donald Trump’s court picks if Republicans vote on late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s replacement this year.

Democrats are threatening to pack the Supreme Court if Republicans fill the vacancy left by liberal Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death on Friday.

“Congress would have to act and expanding the court would be the right place to start,” House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler wrote on Twitter.

Ginsburg herself pushed back against the idea of packing the court when asked about it last year.

https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/19/d...ginsburg-seat/

[togor]

Put it on McConnell and the rest of the GOP. This is a multi-year project for him, slow-walking judicial confirmations in the Obama years, letting holes form in the Federal circuits, then Merrick Garland, then prioritizing confirmations above all other business in the Trump-era Senate, now this unabashedly hypocritical move. The Republican Senate stopped being a institution for passing law years ago and just a cog in the machine to seat judges. And yet when the occasional court ruling goes against them, they and the base still rail about those damnable unelected Federal judges!!!

Someone is going to make a limp-dicked attempt now to say Harry Reid started it, but no, not even close. The decades long conservative project has been to take over the judiciary and rule the country from the bench. Some of that can be said to be a reaction to liberal judicial overreach from the first half of the post-war era. But the antidote for liberal overreach isn't conservative overreach, just as the cure for conservative gerrymandering isn't liberal gerrymandering. It's less gerrymandering.

I still trust the American people. Our government will work better if it is more democratic in the sense that the issues that the great mass of people care about actually about get addressed. As it is, the country is becoming an ungovernable collection of minority factions thwarting each other.

[rayg]

Nothing you wrote relates to my post...

[lyman]

Nothing you wrote relates to my post...

does it ever??

[togor]

Nothing you wrote relates to my post...

Sure it does. Your underlying premise is that drastic actions towards the supreme court will only begin when Democrats do something. I'm pointing out that this cannot possibly be true.

[Gun Smoke]

There is nothing to keep the democrats from doing this anyway if they gain the house and the senate. They have been talking about it ever since Trump got to appoint 2 judges.

This is just another ploy of theirs to try to keep Trump from appointing someone before the election.

[blackhawknj]

And then the Reoublicans come back in and decide to reduce its size ...?

[Art]

And then the Reoublicans come back in and decide to reduce its size ...?

Nope, the appointment is for life. The Repubs could try to reduce its size by attrition but that isn't a very satisfactory option. One of the most popular Presidents in History, in fact the only "President for Life" we've ever had, FDR himself, with massive majorities in both houses tried to pull this off and failed. That doesn't mean Biden and his merry men (and The Squad) would fail but it is a precedent whatever that's worth which isn't very much. The Judicial Act of 1869 the courts operate under today is a law and laws can be repealed or amended.

This is about power. The actual rules are set by votes of the houses of congress by vote and are subject to change at any time. A tradition is not even a rule. Want a tradition??? No Supreme Court Justice has ever had his appointment filibustered. Togor, before you mention Abe Fortas he was already on the Court. His elevation from Associate Justice to Chief Justice was filibustered largely (but not solely) due to ethical concerns that proved to be well founded and led to his resignation. There is a chance that if Fortas hadn't resigned he would have been impeached. Chuck Schumer stated unequivocally that the appointment of Neil Gorsuch was going to be filibustered, a truly unprecedented step. Not against the rules, but truly unprecedented. At the time Gorsuch was about as mild a choice as the Dems could expect. Schumer had sent a signal to the effect that no Trump appointee to the court would be approved by the Senate while he was in position to stall or stop it (read that filibuster) unless he rubber stamped it. When the "Rs" ended the filibuster the Democrats resorted to one of the most shameful political hit jobs and character assisinations in American Political history in the Cavenagh hearings. So righteous indignation falls on deaf ears with me no matter who does it.

The Democrats and a lot of Republicans loath Trump, not just because he is rude, crude and obnoxious but because he's a true outsider. Because, since he doesn't owe anyone anything politically speaking, he is very hard to leverage. It also galls them that he beat old Hillary and he never held a political office.

Also, I don't see how the Dems can expect somebody they tried to railroad out of office using a complete and total frame job to be expected to "play nice" with them.

[Art]

P.S. to my above. The number one thing for Mitch McConnell is maintaining a Republican majority in the Senate. This is important if Trump wins but more important if he doesn't) He has half a dozen vulnerable members he might not want to force into a vote right now. Trump has said he will name a candidate next week. That will mean he will name potential appointee only 4-5 weeks before the election. It would be very difficult to get a vote done before the election for procedural reasons and that would let folks like Gardner, Ernst and especially McSally from having to take a vote that would hurt their chances of reelection.

[Gun Smoke]

The Democrats and a lot of Republicans loath Trump, not just because he is rude, crude and obnoxious but because he's a true outsider. Because, since he doesn't owe anyone anything politically speaking, he is very hard to leverage. It also galls them that he beat old Hillary and he never held a political office.

He speaks for us. Not them.

[Johnny P]

Since Trump was only elected to a 3 year 8 month term, should he have any say in who the next Supreme Court judge will be?