Biden Creating Commission to Study Expanding the Supreme Court

rjs330

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
May 22, 2015
22,258
5,978
64
✟333,183.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Sometimes you need a progressive balance to the president and the Congress. Especially considering the last four years.

The first two years of the Trump Administration was conservatism run amuck--and thank heavens that Americans had the good sense to exercise the only check and balance they had by voting in a majority of Democrats to the House.

How extreme is the current Supreme Court? So extreme that even John Roberts is often voting with the liberals in order to put his finger in the dike.

How dysfunctional is the Supreme Court? See above.

Comon' that's what everyone says. Too many leftists on the court. Too many conservatives on the court. Whatever. When liberals control the court the liberals love it and the conservatives say it's dysfunctional. Vice versa if the court is conservative. In our mind the court is dysfunctional when it doesn't actually go by the constitution. Which is what the libs are famous for.
 
Upvote 0

rjs330

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
May 22, 2015
22,258
5,978
64
✟333,183.00
Faith
Pentecostal
We have to use the only means at our disposal.

HR1.
Statehood for DC and possibly Puerto Rico.
Regaining the courts that were unbalanced by McConnell's treachery.

Look at all the states with Dem governors and Republican legislatures. The people of the state as a whole are obviously saying they want a more progressive state. They are angry at being gerrymandering into voicelessness. PA.WI.MI.KY. All the swing states pretty much.
And then you have a red state like mine where the legislature has probably passed 10 clearly unconstitutional laws that even Coney Barrett would overturn. The moderate Republican governor tries to contain them, but a simple majority can override his vetos.
We are trying to stop a bloodless coup that was weaponized by huge infusions of corporate cash and disinformation/propaganda. 80 million American rose up and said enough. We owe it to them.

Yeah all the things so the democrats can have power in perpetuity. I know that's what you want. A leftist, marxist state filled with socialism. Let's become europe and rid ourselves of what this country was founded for.
 
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
11,075
7,405
✟343,116.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
I definitely think we need to expand the Court, and I have a proposal I think would help depoliticize it. Simply have the Court be made up of the CJ and then the Chief Judge of each Court of Appeals. That's a position that is filled by seniority and has a term of 7 years. That way the court will automatically expand as the Courts of Appeals do, and while there will still be a desire to appoint young ideologues to the Circuit courts to potentially stack the court, it wouldn't be something that can be cleanly controlled by the party in power. It will also help diversify the court both geographically and educationally.
 
Upvote 0

Tiberius Lee

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2017
2,092
2,559
Wisconsin
✟145,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
If it was the first time in history, you would have a point. But it isn’t, the Democrats have done the same in an election year.

They're just aggravated it happened to them. It has zero to do with what they themselves have spoken about when the shoe was on the other foot.

i assume you have a name of Justice who was nominated and appointed on election year by demarcate in past 50 years ? there must be someone , or you wouldn't make a statement like this.
 
Upvote 0

GreatLakes4Ever

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2019
3,436
4,859
38
Midwest
✟261,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Engaged
Don't you think the Senate has right to confirm a judicial pick? That IS the standard. So if the Senate doesn't approve they don't approve. I mean what's the point of an approval process if its pretty much automatic. That's the whole point of checks and balances.

The Senate is to “advise and consent.”It’s one thing to go through the process and bring the nominee in for a yes/no vote. McConnell said he would not even allow hearings for Obama’s pick. McConnell couldn’t even make it look like he was being honest and just voting down Obama’s pick, he said he wouldn’t even allow the Senate do it’s Constitutional duty. There were some senators saying Clinton was never going to be allowed to fill Scalia’s seat if she won in 2016.

Yeah all the things so the democrats can have power in perpetuity. I know that's what you want. A leftist, marxist state filled with socialism. Let's become europe and rid ourselves of what this country was founded for.

Republicans could run on a platform that would attract more voters and simply start winning elections.

Our country was founded on the People deciding what they want it to be, not a self appointed group claiming to be the only “Real Americans” deciding for everyone else what this country will be.
 
Upvote 0

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
23,412
15,559
Colorado
✟427,917.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Don't you think the Senate has right to confirm a judicial pick? That IS the standard. So if the Senate doesn't approve they don't approve. I mean what's the point of an approval process if its pretty much automatic. That's the whole point of checks and balances.
I agree with everything you say. But the senate cannot erase the presidents power to nominate justices, which is exactly what McConnel did re Garland.

Remember: McConnel didnt reject Garland per se. He rejected the president's capacity to nominate anyone due his bogus year-out timing reasoning. Thats blatantly unconstitutional.
 
Upvote 0

Tiberius Lee

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2017
2,092
2,559
Wisconsin
✟145,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I think you're right, GoldenBoy89. I responded to it myself when I voted for Biden too. I couldn't wait to cast my vote for him, so I voted early. I can't express the relief I felt when I first heard that he had won the election. I'm still deeply relieved that we don't have to face four more years of Trump.

I wouldn’t “express the relief” that Biden is elected, yet. Last summer when 4000 Americans were dying each day, and President were suggesting injecting people with Lysol, I thought, Trump is done, there is no way he can get 200 electoral votes, let alone win the election. To my dismay 75 M Americans voted for Trump.

Trump may or may not run in 2024, but looking at the GOP politics it seem like all who wants to run in 2024 are “ Trump wannabe” . So far we have not seen any alternative to Trump ideology in GOP. In 2024 one of the GOP nominee will be “ Trump wannabe” . I fear many people who came out to vote in 2020 will sit at home in 2022 or 2024 election.

As a conservative I don’t want to see one party rule. But until this current GOP is completely dissolved and a moderate party rise which could stand against democrat, I see no reason to put down our guard. I never voted party line, but until this GOP is completely dissolved, I will only vote for democrat.
 
Upvote 0

hislegacy

Memories pre 2021
Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
43,649
13,930
Broken Arrow, OK
✟689,031.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
i assume you have a name of Justice who was nominated and appointed on election year by demarcate in past 50 years ? there must be someone , or you wouldn't make a statement like this.

Read the rest of the post you partially quoted.
 
Upvote 0

GreatLakes4Ever

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2019
3,436
4,859
38
Midwest
✟261,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Engaged
Read the rest of the post you partially quoted.

They quoted all of your post.

Don’t feel bad, @Tiberius Lee. I asked the same question Saturday and @hislegacy just ignored it by only quoting a part of my post to cut the question out. At least you got a response.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: KCfromNC
Upvote 0

Tiberius Lee

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2017
2,092
2,559
Wisconsin
✟145,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Read the rest of the post you partially quoted.

I will answer this for you. in Past 50 years only 2 Justices of SCOTUS were appointed on election year : 1988 and 2020, I will let you figure out which party was in WH.

By the way , I don’t see any thing wrong with this. It is constitutional duty for President and senate to appoint SCOTUS whenever it is vacant.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

hislegacy

Memories pre 2021
Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
43,649
13,930
Broken Arrow, OK
✟689,031.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I will answer this for you. in Past 50 years only 2 Justices of SCOTUS were appointed on election year : 1988 and 2020, I will let you figure out which party was in WH.

By the way , I don’t see any thing wrong with this. It is constitutional duty for President and senate to appoint SCOTUS whenever it is vacant.

It was the party that held the majority of the Senate.

Senate Majority controls the placement of SCOTUS.

There was nothing illegal, nor immoral with Garland. If RGB was still alive, this would be a non issue and not even spoken of. Only when one party became outnumbered in the court did it become and issue.

The previous forty plus years of that party’s majority in the court, there was never a discussion. Not by either party.
 
Upvote 0

Pommer

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic
Sep 13, 2008
16,348
10,241
Earth
✟137,488.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
It was the party that held the majority of the Senate.

Senate Majority controls the placement of SCOTUS.
That’s a “new norm”, interesting that it was Conservatives who brought about that change.
 
Upvote 0

Tiberius Lee

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2017
2,092
2,559
Wisconsin
✟145,602.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
It was the party that held the majority of the Senate.

Senate Majority controls the placement of SCOTUS.

There was nothing illegal, nor immoral with Garland. If RGB was still alive, this would be a non issue and not even spoken of. Only when one party became outnumbered in the court did it become and issue.

The previous forty plus years of that party’s majority in the court, there was never a discussion. Not by either party.


8 month before the election Senate republican didn’t even bring vote to confirm or not to confirm Garland because it was election year, you see nothing illegal or immoral but replacing RGB 3 weeks before the lection is OK ?

As I said , replacing RGB 3 weeks before the election is ok with me because it is the constitutional duty of the Senate. Not bring the vote on the floor for Garland was immoral, hypocrisy and “dereliction of duty” of Senate.
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,037
13,063
✟1,077,154.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
You have to look at the entire situation, hislegacy--and it is certainly a subversion of democracy at the very least. I will use the PBS article because I look at that as a sacrosanct source.

How McConnell's Bid to Reshape the Federal Judiciary Extends Beyond the Supreme Court | Supreme Revenge: Battle for the Court | FRONTLINE | PBS | Official Site

McConnell didn't only leave the Scalia Supreme Court vacancy open several times longer than any other preceding vacancy. He also held back confirmations on numerous lower federal court positions.

It was the politics of obstruction, pure and simple, born of the realization that the only way to impose conservatism on an unwilling populace was to suppress the vote, gerrymander, and stack the courts with judges who would declare anything progressive unconstitutional.
 
Upvote 0

hislegacy

Memories pre 2021
Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
43,649
13,930
Broken Arrow, OK
✟689,031.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
8 month before the election Senate republican didn’t even bring vote to confirm or not to confirm Garland because it was election year, you see nothing illegal or immoral but replacing RGB 3 weeks before the lection is OK ?

As I said , replacing RGB 3 weeks before the election is ok with me because it is the constitutional duty of the Senate. Not bring the vote on the floor for Garland was immoral, hypocrisy and “dereliction of duty” of Senate.

Cite the laws broken or ethics violations broken.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

hislegacy

Memories pre 2021
Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
43,649
13,930
Broken Arrow, OK
✟689,031.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You have to look at the entire situation, hislegacy--and it is certainly a subversion of democracy at the very least. I will use the PBS article because I look at that as a sacrosanct source.

I did not read beyond that right there -

There is nothing sacrosanct about ANY news source. PBS is neither sacred nor infallible.
 
Upvote 0

GreatLakes4Ever

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2019
3,436
4,859
38
Midwest
✟261,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Engaged
Cite the laws broken or ethics violations broken.

McConnell refused to advise and consent as the Constitution dictates when Obama made his pick. McConnell refused to do anything. He could have held hearings and votes and shot down Obama’s pick and stayed within the Constitution. McConnell couldn’t be bothered to do that.

It is nice to know that as long as expanding the court is done legally and there are no ethics violations there will be no complaints from you since that seems to be the line that can’t be crossed and as long as it’s legal it’s good.
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Cite the laws broken or ethics violations broken.

Are there no other yardsticks to determine right from wrong?
Is our nation's collective conscience that badly broken?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Pommer
Upvote 0

hislegacy

Memories pre 2021
Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
43,649
13,930
Broken Arrow, OK
✟689,031.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
McConnell refused to advise and consent as the Constitution dictates when Obama made his pick. McConnell refused to do anything. He could have held hearings and votes and shot down Obama’s pick and stayed within the Constitution. McConnell couldn’t be bothered to do that..

While a valid complaint - still does not break any ethics or legal issues.

It is nice to know that as long as expanding the court is done legally and there are no ethics violations there will be no complaints from you since that seems to be the line that can’t be crossed and as long as it’s legal it’s good.

Yes, if it is ethical and legal - that is what makes it 'good'. However Just like right now people will complain. I would have the right to complain then, just as you have the right to now.

Being ethical and legal does not prevent the losing side to stop complaining - never has - never will. That right is still here.

Are there no other yardsticks to determine right from wrong?
Is our nation's collective conscience that badly broken?

No, not at all - the yardsticks are rules of ethics and written law. That is the representation of our nations collective conscious. We are free and able to change those laws through our representatives.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
No, not at all - the yardsticks are rules of ethics and written law.

...and absolutely nothing beyond that.

Every day on Christian Forums, I learn something new.
 
Upvote 0