Innocynioc
Platinum Member
- Feb 24, 2017
- 522
- 436
- 878
Refrain from repairing that which functions correctly.
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.
Which is not relevant, here.Refrain from repairing that which functions correctly.
1. In basketball, is the objective to see how many dribbles you can do down the court? No, it's to put the ball in the hoop. Popular vote is not how elections are decided. If it were, both Bush and Trump would have campaigned differently. I am glad my candidates were smart enough to know the rules and campaign according to them.Justices are chosen by a president.
Presidents are elected through FPTP, which is exacerbated by Congress being chosen by FPTP which leads to a partisan two party system.
This means that Presidents are often quite partisan, Clinton was probably the least partisan in the last 50 years, and they impeached him.
This means a Supreme Court justice in order to get noticed, has to be kind of partisan too. This then pushes the whole judicial system towards partisan politics.
Also, it's all about games. Look at all the justices there.
Trump in 4 years got three justice picks.
Obama in 8 years got two justice picks.
Bush in 8 years got two justice picks.
Of these Trump and Bush's first election, neither got the popular vote.
So, only one right wing Justice was put in place by a President who became president with the popular vote, Thomas, and he's corrupt.
It doesn't represent the US. It represents THE SYSTEM and the system is broken beyond belief.
Haha, and here we see the right wing bullshit they are going to attempt.2. If Thomas is corrupt, all the justices are. All take trips and gifts.
And Obama only got two picks because McConnell blocked his third.
The Court was expanded to the current 9 because there were nine circuits at the time.Who would even think thast is relevant?
So we ignore that Mitch the Bitch held the Scalia seat open for almost a year claiming that you can’t appoint a SCOTUS Justice in the last year of any Administration… and then promptly rammed through a Justice appointment in the waning months of the Trump Admin1. In basketball, is the objective to see how many dribbles you can do down the court? No, it's to put the ball in the hoop. Popular vote is not how elections are decided. If it were, both Bush and Trump would have campaigned differently. I am glad my candidates were smart enough to know the rules and campaign according to them.
2. If Thomas is corrupt, all the justices are. All take trips and gifts.
3. 0bama only got two picks because Ginsburg was too arrogant and self-important to retire.
Elections have consequences-Barry Hussein.So we ignore that Mitch the Bitch held the Scalia seat open for almost a year claiming that you can’t appoint a SCOTUS Justice in the last year of any Administration… and then promptly rammed through a Justice appointment in the waning months of the Trump Admin
Stopped Garland who lists a Father of a Raped child as a dometic terrorist.So we ignore that Mitch the Bitch held the Scalia seat open for almost a year claiming that you can’t appoint a SCOTUS Justice in the last year of any Administration… and then promptly rammed through a Justice appointment in the waning months of the Trump Admin
It should be a even number that way when they have a 6 to 6 vote then it will be what do we do now!
So we ignore that Mitch the Bitch held the Scalia seat open for almost a year claiming that you can’t appoint a SCOTUS Justice in the last year of any Administration
Here's the real question.
He didn't say you can't.
If the number of Supreme Court justices were increased to 13, it could potentially shift the ideological balance of the court. Currently, the Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority, with Chief Justice John Roberts often being a swing vote.
If the number of Supreme Court justices were increased to 13, it could potentially shift the ideological balance of the court. Currently, the Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority, with Chief Justice John Roberts often being a swing vote.
If the court were expanded to 13 justices, it is likely that the additional four justices appointed by a Democratic president would shift the balance to a more liberal-leaning court. This shift in ideological balance could impact the way decisions are made by the court.
With a more liberal-leaning majority, there could be a greater likelihood of decisions favoring liberal interpretations of the law, such as on issues like abortion rights( more killings expected ), LGBTQ+ rights( I'm not against them ), and environmental regulations.
This could also result in a shift in the court's approach to certain constitutional issues, such as the Second Amendment and affirmative action. Additionally, a larger Supreme Court could also lead to more diverse perspectives and considerations in the decision-making process.
With more justices on the bench, there could be a wider range of legal expertise and experiences brought to the table, potentially leading to more nuanced and well-rounded decisions.
However, any change to the number of Supreme Court justices would likely be highly contentious and subject to political debate and opposition. The potential impact of an expanded court would depend on the specific individuals appointed and their judicial philosophies, as well as the broader political climate at the time.
Edit: Actually, the SCOTUS group should not wear any type of collar( Blue or Red ). They are not the political parties' pets, right? lol.![]()