Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Pack in 1,001 judges, 500 Left wing and 501 Right wing, or vice versa. It doesn't matter which way the vote goes, the losing side will still want to pack more judges in to get the decision they want. As for ethics, just simply no gifts can be accepted or you're out. Can a supreme court judge be impeached?I've said he is not qualified buy why people are so willing to allow so much money influence our top court is beyond me.
I was thinking Juno, Alaska personally.Save time, just move it to a kangaroo farm Rufus.
I imagine the next time the Democrats get the House and Senate. AS Republicans like myself historically were against activist courts, ethics and maximum terms are something we should want.Face it, you are not going to be able to change a damn thing about the supreme court. Biden is simply manipulating you and the other retards
So any accusations of “crappy” behavior toward women and what about “ crappy” behavior to ward men, would all of it eliminate a candidate? So basically guilty until proven innocent? Would that apply to all three branches or just the judicial and would it be all of the judges or just the Supreme Court?And? These are all common sense suggestions. There should be no lifetime tenure on the SC (15-20 years max) and there should be an ethics code. As well as a morality code for nominees.
Thomas and Kavanaugh's nominations should have been scrapped the moment allegations of their crappy behavior toward women was made public. Alito and Thomas should both be shown the door
for their ethics violations.
None of this is "undermining" the institution.
If you can cut paste you can read it.I was thinking Juno, Alaska personally.
I imagine the next time the Democrats get the House and Senate. AS Republicans like myself historically were against activist courts, ethics and maximum terms are something we should want.
As for Congress setting up different courts:
Section 1
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Section 2
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment; shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.
Pretty sure sexual assault and harassment goes beyond "crappy" behavior.So any accusations of “crappy” behavior toward women and what about “ crappy” behavior to ward men, would all of it eliminate a candidate? So basically guilty until proven innocent? Would that apply to all three branches or just the judicial and would it be all of the judges or just the Supreme Court?
What about term limits, accusations of “crappy” behavior, true or not, for the other branches of government?
I lash out with mockery and amusement, yes. These aren't emotions I'm ashamed of or that prevent me from making rational arguments. I made one and now I'm laughing at your emotional response to it.Ironic that instead of a reasonable response you lash out. Ironic
Bullshit. A Republican Congress is not responsive to the will of the people.
Polls show the American people support the ACA
Republican Congress tried to get rid of it
Polls show the American people favor a woman’s right to choose. Republican Congress refuses to consider it
The American people favor gun control . Republican Congress blocks even the most sensible regulations
Where have you made rational arguments rastus, I missed thatI lash out with mockery and amusement, yes. These aren't emotions I'm ashamed of or that prevent me from making rational arguments. I made one and now I'm laughing at your emotional response to it.
Right here, you know, the one you lashed out with a emotional strawman in response of?Where have you made rational arguments rastus, I missed that
That's stupid and a glaring misunderstanding of what checks and balances means. If the Supreme Court were self regulating it would put them about every other branch. The Supreme Court can be regulated by Congress in terms of legislation, appointment and impeachment.
I disagree. That is NOT the argument of a rational personRight here, you know, the one you lashed out with a emotional strawman in response of?
He just needs 3/4 of the States to go along with this Constitutional Amendment
Biden to announce support for major changes to Supreme Court amid outrage over recent decisions: report
President Biden is reportedly planning to propose changes to the U.S. Supreme Court that could include proposals for legislation to establish term limits.www.foxnews.com
President Biden is reportedly planning to endorse major changes to the U.S. Supreme Court, including proposals for legislation to establish term limits for the justices and an enforceable ethics code, as growing outrage continues following a series of controversial decisions.
"This decision today has continued the court’s attack in recent years on a wide range of long-established legal principles in our nation, from gutting voting rights (that is a lie) and civil rights (that is a lie) to taking away a woman’s right to choose (that is a lie), to today’s decision that undermines the rule of law of this nation,(that is a lie)" Biden said in public remarks later that day.
Comment:
Our constitution was designed to protect the citizens from a tyrannical government.
The Supreme Court is trying to protect us from the lawless Democrat Party.
They are not saving "democracy", they want a one-party dictatorship.
The corrupt Democrat Party can't operate within the bounds of our constitution; therefore, they are trying to destroy the balance of power between the Executive branch, Legislative branch and Judicial branch.
This is very dangerous; they will create a totalitarian police state.
Ok.... who gives a shit about your statement of disagreement? Can you make an intellectual counter argument or did you just raise your hand to tell me you don't like it, which is an emotion. An emo one.I disagree. That is NOT the argument of a rational person
Yep. Should be a walk in the park.He just needs 3/4 of the States to go along with this Constitutional Amendment
Well, it’s a long shot, with any luck the GOPers rubber spines will stiffen long enough to get in the way. Most likely the Bidet people factored this in and it is just a campaign maneuver.Biden to announce support for major changes to Supreme Court amid outrage over recent decisions: report
President Biden is reportedly planning to propose changes to the U.S. Supreme Court that could include proposals for legislation to establish term limits.
President Biden is reportedly planning to endorse major changes to the U.S. Supreme Court, including proposals for legislation to establish term limits for the justices and an enforceable ethics code, as growing outrage continues following a series of controversial decisions.
"This decision today has continued the court’s attack in recent years on a wide range of long-established legal principles in our nation, from gutting voting rights (that is a lie) and civil rights (that is a lie) to taking away a woman’s right to choose (that is a lie), to today’s decision that undermines the rule of law of this nation,(that is a lie)" Biden said in public remarks later that day.
Comment:
Our constitution was designed to protect the citizens from a tyrannical government.
The Supreme Court is trying to protect us from the lawless Democrat Party.
They are not saving "democracy", they want a one-party dictatorship.
The corrupt Democrat Party can't operate within the bounds of our constitution; therefore, they are trying to destroy the balance of power between the Executive branch, Legislative branch and Judicial branch.
This is very dangerous; they will create a totalitarian police state.
Like the left tards here.Even the dems on a CNN panel said this afternoon that it was a pipe dream and that FJB was just kowtowing to the extreme left of the dem party......Then again I'm sure the leftist faggots over on MS-LSD were masterbating furiously over it.
Yep. Should be a walk in the park.
For starters, the supreme court is the arbitor of constitutional arguments. That DOES put them in a supreme position over the other branches.Ok.... who gives a shit about your statement of disagreement? Can you make an intellectual counter argument or did you just raise your hand to tell me you don't like it, which is an emotion. An emo one.
The ability of Congress to impeach and write new legislation seriously damages that argument.For starters, the supreme court is the arbitor of constitutional arguments. That DOES put them in a supreme position over the other branches.
That's why your arguing something so stupid it demands ridicule
No. That is a check on abuses of the court.The ability of Congress to impeach and write new legislation seriously damages that argument.
exactly what I said, your reading comprehension is marginal at best.That's stupid and a glaring misunderstanding of what checks and balances means. If the Supreme Court were self regulating it would put them about every other branch. The Supreme Court can be regulated by Congress in terms of legislation, appointment and impeachment.
