Is it now time to expand the Supreme Court?

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: AlexandrosOMegas

Dropped to 11? There's currently nine justices sitting on the Supreme Court.

You fell hard for that one. 😃

originally posted by: Boomer1947

originally posted by: Irishhaf
I find it funny, when the Supreme court was only ruling in ways that made the left happy I never heard the right scream pack the court.

.....

The Right wasn't screaming it, they were just quietly and methodically going about doing it with the assistance of Mitch McConnell, Donald Trump, and the Federalist Society. It wasn't an accident that Trump got to appoint 3 conservative judges, all approved by the Federalist Society in one 4 year term.

Are you suggesting Supreme Court Nominations and Confirmations are rigged???? 😀

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: Boomer1947
It wasn't an accident that Trump got to appoint 3 conservative judges, all approved by the Federalist Society in one 4 year term.

It wasn't an accident ... it was the fault of RBG who refused to retire when Obama was POTUS.

Reading between the lines, I would think that, just maybe, RBG didn't like or trust Obama's proposed replacement of her to protect the things she believed in and fought so hard to install, knowing that our rights are constantly teetering on the proverbial constitutional edge, that the SCOTUS justices maintain, or not.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Dandandat3

Yes. The court NEEDS to be expanded, (not packed).

Currently, there are 13 US Circuit Court Districts and 9 Supreme Court Justices to preside over them. So, some justices are doubling up, and some are not. These districts are like empires for these justices, who have the ability to work agendas through their court systems.

I say we need at least 3 Supreme Court Justices for each district, 39 Supreme Court Justices. Congress would have to pass a bill regulating the timing, perhaps over a few decades, and certain considerations for states' input on nominating and seating these justices, so that one president/party isn't packing the courts with single minded ideologues.

How would you eliminate the rabid politicizing of each Justice Nomination and Confirmation on lower levels? 😃

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Dandandat3

Yes. The court NEEDS to be expanded, (not packed).

Currently, there are 13 US Circuit Court Districts and 9 Supreme Court Justices to preside over them. So, some justices are doubling up, and some are not. These districts are like empires for these justices, who have the ability to work agendas through their court systems.

I say we need at least 3 Supreme Court Justices for each district, 39 Supreme Court Justices. Congress would have to pass a bill regulating the timing, perhaps over a few decades, and certain considerations for states' input on nominating and seating these justices, so that one president/party isn't packing the courts with single minded ideologues.

How would you eliminate the rabid politicizing of each Justice Nomination and Confirmation on lower levels? 😃

That's never going to happen, whether or not the court is expanded.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: FlyersFan

It's also the fault of McConnell for creating a rule out of thin air that prevented Garland from being appointed and then not applying that rule to Trump.

Garland didn't have the votes anyway, so why embarrass him with a loss? 😃

a reply to: xuenchen

Going back to treating confirmation hearings as a formality.

The Constitution does not give Congress the power to approve or deny a President's candidate. All it says is that the President must seek Congress' advice before appointing a justice.

There's nothing that says they have to listen to their advice.

a reply to: Dandandat3

Ah, once again we get the lefts version on "democracy," whatever it takes for them to stay in power. Drop dead.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Dandandat3

Yes. The court NEEDS to be expanded, (not packed).

Currently, there are 13 US Circuit Court Districts and 9 Supreme Court Justices to preside over them. So, some justices are doubling up, and some are not. These districts are like empires for these justices, who have the ability to work agendas through their court systems.

I say we need at least 3 Supreme Court Justices for each district, 39 Supreme Court Justices. Congress would have to pass a bill regulating the timing, perhaps over a few decades, and certain considerations for states' input on nominating and seating these justices, so that one president/party isn't packing the courts with single minded ideologues.

Some examples of "Agenda Working" by Justices would be great to expose!!

Can you start with the top 10 over, let's say, the past 40 years that have clear agenda workings?

Should be easy since you say this is a huge enough problem to expand to the magnitude you describe. 😀

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: xuenchen

Going back to treating confirmation hearings as a formality.

The Constitution does not give Congress the power to approve or deny a President's candidate. All it says is that the President must seek Congress' advice before appointing a justice.

There's nothing that says they have to listen to their advice.

No...The Constitution's Appointment Clause says the Senate has to provide advice and consent.

Wow, this thread has so much idiocy to it. So much to unpack and respond to. So first off, for boomer and anyone mad Trump had as many supreme court nominations. Be mad a Ruth Ginsburg for staying on the bench despite her serious health issues! She could have retired earlier and guaranteed Obama would appoint her replacement, instead she staid and died in office! Her health issues were known, she had been in treatment for them for some time. But no, she stayed to her bitter end and that cost the left her spot.
Second off, would packing the court benof any help? Leaving aside how often the left ignores SC rulings they don't like, correct me if I am wrong but didn't Trump get an unanimous decision in his case against Colorado removing him from the ballot? Choosing to ignore that inconvenient fact?

Let's break this down:

CNN is upset because they believe the Supreme Court is acting political and authoritarian, so they want to go to a system that would make the Justices even more susceptible to public pressure?

The current system allows judge's to be appointed for life. This allows them to make a decision free from the threats of being removed from office. It also allows them to be immune from the current mob rule.

For example, Brown v. Board of Education put an end to racial segregation. It never would have passed congress at that time. In most States, the public didn't want gay marriage and it remained illegal until the Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges.

Packing the Supreme Court will just make the Supreme Court Congress - version 2. It will literally be a proxy for Congress.

We don't need another Congress.

a reply to: xuenchen

EZ
Reproductive rights being challenged and felled through Texas' Fifth Circuit District Court System, overseen by Justice Alito.

Four DEI appointments, GUARANTEED. It wouldn't surprise many if they tried to field a "commoner" without much judicial experience but you know, he or she will have the pulse of the streets... smh. Or perhaps an embittered, gender confused, feminist LatinX. That would be so forward, so progressive.. 🙄

The leftist ideologies are imploding all across the US, one stupid idea after the other and yet they want MORE leeway to fk it up even harder! Lol

I predict their appointment choices to be an illegal, criminal "immigrant", another pick could be a struggling fentanyl addict. Perhaps another could be a human trafficker, and to round out the group, they'll appoint a seasoned sociopathic extortionist with a penchant for toddler fragrance.

You people are a joke. VOX is a joke.These "unicorn" ideologies and social experiments are actually NOT a joke and they are getting people hurt and killed!! The very people you support and defend are going to FORCE YOU to FAFO.

Be sure to thank them for the collapse of society however which way it goes down, because there's nothing soft, pillowy or fluffy about where this is all landing.

a reply to: VariedcodeSole

Ketanji is just that.
Straight up diversity hire.
Checks them boxes.
Doesn’t know what a woman is.
Thinks bump stocks shoot 800 rounds per second.
The most Unqualified Justice ever.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: FlyersFan

It's also the fault of McConnell for creating a rule out of thin air that prevented Garland from being appointed and then not applying that rule to Trump.

Trump didn't want to be a judge. McConnell stopping Garland from a seat was the one good thing he ever did.

Garland would have been a huge disaster for America to be given a seat. America can certainly be glad you're not one too.
With the total retards and Marxist degenerates that HAVE been appointed all over, you certainly could have a shot at it though.
.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: xuenchen

EZ
Reproductive rights being challenged and felled through Texas' Fifth Circuit District Court System, overseen by Justice Alito.

What exactly did Alito do that was agenda working? What was the direct detailed influence? There must be some written evidence❗️

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: xuenchen

EZ
Reproductive rights being challenged and felled through Texas' Fifth Circuit District Court System, overseen by Justice Alito.

“Reproductive rights” ?
How about our 2nd amendment rights that are actually in the constitution?

The left wants everything that doesn’t fall in step with their draconian measures to be destroyed and rebuilt to their liking, rules be damned.
Like Trump on trial during the election, I mean anyone can see that’s the goal here, right?

a reply to: Boogerpicker

Libs loved the supreme court in 2021 when they wouldn't take Trump's election fraud case.

Libs hate the supreme court in 2024 when they'll likely clear Trumps BS insurrection charges.

They whine that there's a conservative majority in the U.S. meanwhile this country is full of crooked political minded judges, district attorneys, prosecutors, etc. that are willing to throw all integrity out the window to "get Trump".

They're banking on you having a short memory.