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 🎁
The court is fine as it is. Expanding it accomplishes nothing. It just opens the door for more expansion--what's next 51 justices, one for every state and DC? I don't see any real need except to placate disgruntled politicians who are trying to circumvent the constitution.I'd be fine with expanding it to 13, one for each circuit court, but in my opinion, it should be done gradually over a period of 16 years, one additional justice per presidential term. That's the only way to make it fair.
So, you WANT Trump to live up to the scurrilous accusations made against him?
That he is a would-be dictator.Which accusation would that be?
You think Democrats won’t be trying to expand the court again? You’re a fool.The court is fine as it is. Expanding it accomplishes nothing. It just opens the door for more expansion--what's next 51 justices, one for every state and DC? I don't see any real need except to placate disgruntled politicians who are trying to circumvent the constitution.
Yes.That he is a would-be dictator.
Why?I'd be fine with expanding it to 13, one for each circuit court, but in my opinion, it should be done gradually over a period of 16 years, one additional justice per presidential term. That's the only way to make it fair.
But a 9-3 court...What's the difference between a 5-4 court and a 6-5 court or a 7-6 court?
The more decision makers the less chance of a close vote.Expanding the number of Supreme Court positions is something that will require at least 60 votes in the Senate, something that neither party is likely to achieve anytime soon. And that is as it should be IMHO. I do not see the GOP doing that, but the democrats would and probably will when they are able to do so by abolishing the filibuster. What's the difference between a 5-4 court and a 6-5 court or a 7-6 court? I'm not seeing a positive change here, but it will put more emphasis on Senate elections, cuz then you'll have more frequent vacancies.
The simple truth is that the democrats want control of the Supreme Court in their favor and they will resort to any means necessary to achieve that.
FDR tried it in his last term to justify the most notorious affront to the Constitution in history (E.O. 9066) and it was a downward turning point in his administration.
Not at all. I don't harbor any such illusions and I will oppose it every time it comes up. There is absolutely no need to expand the court.You think Democrats won’t be trying to expand the court again? You’re a fool.
Under the reasonable assumption that Trump wins, and has enough tail to take the senate…
The very first item on his legislative agenda should be an expansion of the Supreme Court.
Liberals have been screaming for it since the McConnell gambit, and have been standing up to scream it since Dobbs.
No reason he cannot give it to them.
They will, of course, suddenly oppose this idea - with ever fiber of their being.
Fuck fair, go for the throat and keep squeezing.....Do you ever see the dems being "fair" when they hold total sway?I'd be fine with expanding it to 13, one for each circuit court, but in my opinion, it should be done gradually over a period of 16 years, one additional justice per presidential term. That's the only way to make it fair.
Not real sure there'd be enough votes in the congress, even with big fall wins, to pull off a change in title 28.Under the reasonable assumption that Trump wins, and has enough tail to take the senate…
The very first item on his legislative agenda should be an expansion of the Supreme Court.
Liberals have been screaming for it since the McConnell gambit, and have been standing up to scream it since Dobbs.
No reason he cannot give it to them.
They will, of course, suddenly oppose this idea - with ever fiber of their being.
Noooo kidding.....Just to point out. The size of the court is set by law.
But it can - and so the question is:Not going to happen.
Democrats do not want fair. They have proven that.I'd be fine with expanding it to 13, one for each circuit court, but in my opinion, it should be done gradually over a period of 16 years, one additional justice per presidential term. That's the only way to make it fair.
I could see Trump doing that, and pretty much all historical parallels would fall into place.Why don't you go and dig FDR up. Ask him how that worked out for him?
Do not forget that the proposed amendment must be ratified by 37 states. That is the point that is keeping the ERA from being enshrined.View attachment 978864
Just to point out. The size of the court is set by law.
Even if Trump wins and has a majority of the Senate he doesn't get to illegally place more Justices on the court without the concurrence of Congress by changing the law.
He'd need to win, then he'd need the House, and he'd need 60 votes in the Senate. Only then could he do it legally.
Not going to happen.
WW
You should spit out that mouthful of shit. It can't be good for you.I could see Trump doing that, and pretty much all historical parallels would fall into place.
<Snort>I could see Trump doing that, and pretty much all historical parallels would fall into place.
