Biden Creating Commission to Study Expanding the Supreme Court

[hislegacy]

Odd... it used to be impossible with the last guy.

It was done continuously by the left so why is it not valid when the right does it.

What’s happening is exactly the same the shoe is just on the other foot. If you go back to those who are criticizing Trump Trump and those defending him and just switch it to Biden and those defending Biden it sounds exactly the same

 

[hislegacy]

When one political party is in the majority and they come out plainly speaking against packing the courts. Including Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Then they lose their majority became the majority in the Senate and now they want to pack the courts.

That is my definition a power grab.

The placement of justices on the Supreme Court has always followed the majority of those in control of the Senate. There are very few times that the Senate has placed a justice that wasn’t in their party lines when they were in the majority.
for the last three decades while there were more liberals on the court then conservatives the Democratic leader ship promoted and supported leaving the court at nine. The Democratic leader ship had no voice of opposition to lifetime appointments to the court.

The moment the very moment they lost control of the Supreme Court. The very moment they were more conservative than liberals on the Supreme Court they champion the call to change the number of seats on the court And call for term limits.

That is plain and historical fact

 

[mark46]

Throw Gorsuch and Barrett off the court right now and I’ll agree with you. Otherwise ignoring it just gives McConnell or anyone else license to do what he did again.

Make no mistake, this is ALL about Gorsuch.

Otherwise, you are saying the president has no right to appoint nominees that agree with him.

The question is whether our judicial system should be trashed because of the one misdeed of McConnell. I believe that court-packing has been proposed before.

Much can and SHOULD be done. We need hundreds of new judges. The Democrats run the risk of presenting the Republicans with a second issue for 2022 (immigration is the other). Republicans can run on protecting the Senate from over-reach by Democrats. Let's be clear, if the Sanders folk have their way, their will be a vote to pack the Court. This effort will FAIL, since at least one Democrat will oppose such an effort.

And THEN, and THEN, the Democrats will lose the Senate, for no reason whatsoever other than pleasing the left.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Make no mistake, this is ALL about Gorsuch.

Otherwise, you are saying the president has no right to appoint nominees that agree with him.

The question is whether our judicial system should be trashed because of the one misdeed of McConnell. I believe that court-packing has been proposed before.

Much can and SHOULD be done. We need hundreds of new judges. The Democrats run the risk of presenting the Republicans with a second issue for 2022 (immigration is the other). Republicans can run on protecting the Senate from over-reach by Democrats. Let's be clear, if the Sanders folk have their way, their will be a vote to pack the Court. This effort will FAIL, since at least one Democrat will oppose such an effort.

And THEN, and THEN, the Democrats will lose the Senate, for no reason whatsoever other than pleasing the left.

It’s a combination of Gorsuch and Barrett. If Garland wasn’t allowed then Barrett shouldn’t have been either. If Garland was allowed Barrett should have as well.

If given the chance McConnell will do the exact same thing again, I would bet my life on it. This is why there needs to be punishment for it. If it ends up costing him two seats he’d think twice before doing it again. This attitude of letting it slide only emboldens people to do it again. Do you want to let the senate majority leader to say that they aren’t going to allow the president to make a Supreme Court pick if they aren’t the same party as the senate majority leader? Because that has been decided as the way to operate now unless people see there is a steep cost to pulling that trick.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

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.

What year and with which nominee did that happen? And then when and with which nominee did they do the opposite for the next election?

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.

Republicans are just aggravated that there might be consequences to their hypocrisy on this issue. Democrats are just fighting back.

 

[Fantine]

Yes, the number of judges should be increased in many of the courts, most obviously in immigration courts.

Of course, that says nothing about the Supreme Court. I think Democrats are very wrong on this one.

The same article said more Supreme Court justices would lessen the political aspect. Why? Because 1 justice's retirement would have much less of an impact.if there had been 15 justices, Scalia's death might not have prompted McConnell to ignore Garland's nomination for a year, because it wouldn't have made the same difference.
I agree.

 

[mark46]

Roosevelt had a huge majority in Congress after the 1936 election. He secretly made plans before announcing his court-packing attack on the very fabric of democracy. After one of the most viscous debates in US history, the Senate finally withdrew the bill, with cries of "Glory to God" coming from one of the senators.

Biden can have this debate again. The result will be a year (6 months of investigations and hearings, and 6 months of heated debate). The leftists have what they want, a debate on one of their sacred principles.

In the meantime, little will get done once the report comes out, and win or lose, the Democrats will have reduced the number of senators elected in 2022. This will not affect elections is very blue districts in the Senate and the House. Progressive Democrats will not lose their seats. As was the case in 2020, it is moderate Democrats who will pay the price. [We do remember that Republicans gained seats in the House and would have controlled the Senate absent Trump's antics in Georgia]
====================
THE BOTTOM LINE
is that Biden is pushing hard and as quickly as possible to pass as much as he can before ONE or TWO Democrats stop supporting some of his legislation.

It’s a combination of Gorsuch and Barrett. If Garland wasn’t allowed then Barrett shouldn’t have been either. If Garland was allowed Barrett should have as well.

If given the chance McConnell will do the exact same thing again, I would bet my life on it. This is why there needs to be punishment for it. If it ends up costing him two seats he’d think twice before doing it again. This attitude of letting it slide only emboldens people to do it again. Do you want to let the senate majority leader to say that they aren’t going to allow the president to make a Supreme Court pick if they aren’t the same party as the senate majority leader? Because that has been decided as the way to operate now unless people see there is a steep cost to pulling that trick.

 

[Fantine]

Promises kept!

But honestly, he will keep the promise by ordering this study, and that's it.

In the unlikely event that it recommends packing the court, he will nevertheless not pack the court.

Let's not use the terms of the right to drive up negative opinion. Balance, not pack.

 

[Fantine]

Roosevelt had a huge majority in Congress after the 1936 election. He secretly made plans before announcing his court-packing attack on the very fabric of democracy. After one of the most viscous debates in US history, the Senate finally withdrew the bill, with cries of "Glory to God" coming from one of the senators.

Biden can have this debate again. The result will be a year (6 months of investigations and hearings, and 6 months of heated debate). The leftists have what they want, a debate on one of their sacred principles.

In the meantime, little will get done once the report comes out, and win or lose, the Democrats will have reduced the number of senators elected in 2022. This will not affect elections is very blue districts in the Senate and the House. Progressive Democrats will not lose their seats. As was the case in 2020, it is moderate Democrats who will pay the price. [We do remember that Republicans gained seats in the House and would have controlled the Senate absent Trump's antics in Georgia]
====================
THE BOTTOM LINE
is that Biden is pushing hard and as quickly as possible to pass as much as he can before ONE or TWO Democrats stop supporting some of his legislation.

Biden's proposals have wide support--and swing sites like Pennsylvania can't gerrymander the state as a whole.
Yes, we need HR1, but I am sure the courts will eviscerate the voter suppression laws, too.

 

[hislegacy]

Republicans are just aggravated that there might be consequences to their hypocrisy on this issue. Democrats are just fighting back.

Hypocrisy? Less than Four years ago Democrats were against the very actions they are now supporting.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Hypocrisy? Less than Four years ago Democrats were against the very actions they are now supporting.

Was McConnell wrong for saying that the people should get decide on the pick so they couldn’t have a vote on Garland in 2016? Because Democrats were just following what McConnell said in 2016 when they complained about Barrett’s confirmation in 2020. McConnell has shown that doing anything that gains your party power and limits your opponent power is fair game. Were they not supposed to hold McConnell to the standard he himself set? I thought Republicans are supposed to be personally accountable. Is that just a lie Republicans tell?

 

[Aldebaran]

Biden Creating Commission to Study Expanding the Supreme Court



"For Us, by the Elites."

This finally answers the question the media kept asking about before the election but he kept refusing to answer.
But we really knew the answer all along. Now he's just proving us correct.

 

[Aldebaran]

Let's not use the terms of the right to drive up negative opinion. Balance, not pack.

I didn't know that USA Today was on the Right:
Republicans packed the Supreme Court, expand it to repair the damage
Republicans have already packed the Supreme Court. Unpack it by making it bigger.

 

[hislegacy]

Was McConnell wrong for saying that the people should get decide on the pick so they couldn’t have a vote on Garland in 2016? Because Democrats were just following what McConnell said in 2016 when they complained about Barrett’s confirmation in 2020. McConnell has shown that doing anything that gains your party power and limits your opponent power is fair game. Were they not supposed to hold McConnell to the standard he himself set? I thought Republicans are supposed to be personally accountable. Is that just a lie Republicans tell?

After 2016. Democratic leader ship supported not expanding the court. Democratic leader ship said nothing about term limits for supreme court justices.

What is changed in the last 12 months?

 

[mark46]

Let's not use the terms of the right to drive up negative opinion. Balance, not pack.

The implication is that one of the roles of a new incoming administration is to assess whether the Supreme Court is balanced enough for them If not, they should try to pack the court. Also, they should do this if they are afraid that the Supreme COurt will make decisions unfavorable to their future actions and laws.

Roosevelt took this approach after a hugely successful re-election with huge majorities in Congress. Roosevelt failed miserably. Do you REALLY believe that every single Democrat will approve this apporach.

No, of course not. The Democrats will try and fail. The longer this issue lasts, the worse the chances for a Democratic majority in the Senate in 2022.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

After 2016. Democratic leader ship supported not expanding the court. Democratic leader ship said nothing about term limits for supreme court justices.

What is changed in the last 12 months?

Control of the White House and the Senate. They are playing McConnell’s game of do whatever you can to expand your power and whatever you can do to limit your opponents power. Republicans shouldn’t be complaining that Democrats are playing the same game they’ve been playing for years.

 

[mark46]

Biden's proposals have wide support--and swing sites like Pennsylvania can't gerrymander the state as a whole.
Yes, we need HR1, but I am sure the courts will eviscerate the voter suppression laws, too.

Please present the polls that show that a majority of voters is swing states want Biden to pack the Supreme Court.

Let's be clear. You just don't believe in the Supreme Court (and the lower courts) as a balance against the other branches AS IT HAS BEEN in many dozens of cases in the past 5 years.

If the Democrats cannot write a law that passes the muster of the courts, then so be it. SURELY, Democrats should be able to craft such a law. Do you expect the recovery bill to be trashed? the infrastructure bill? No.

The issue is very simply. You disagree with the conservatism of the current court, and refuse to believe that the President and the Congress can pass laws that will past muster with your own views. This is NOT a reason to pack the Court (which has ZERO chances of becoming law and, if passed, would be reversed by the next packing by a Republican president).

The answer is have Congress pass laws. The TRUE answer is to do all we can to elect Democratic senators and House members. Then, Puerto Rico and DC will be states, and more of the Democratic agenda will become law.

 

[mark46]

I didn't know that USA Today was on the Right:
Republicans packed the Supreme Court, expand it to repair the damage
Republicans have already packed the Supreme Court. Unpack it by making it bigger.

And make it bigger again when the Republicans have a majority, and again, and again.
========
Let's stop this nonsense and expand the lower courts that need to be expanded. There could be hundreds of new Democratic judges in the next 18 months.

 

[mark46]

Biden's proposals have wide support--and swing sites like Pennsylvania can't gerrymander the state as a whole.
Yes, we need HR1, but I am sure the courts will eviscerate the voter suppression laws, too.

Biden has strong support for gun control, the stimulus, infrastructure and for expansion of Obamacare.

THEREFORE, let's try to pack the court and see how that efforts affects public opinion in swing states.

Was this plan written by Republican leaders. Nope, they have little influence and few ideas. Such a tactic could only be dreamed up by those who don't like Biden's path, within the Democratic Party.

 

[TLK Valentine]

It was done continuously by the left so why is it not valid when the right does it.

Who said anything about "valid"? Why are you asking me for validity?
I wasn't sure it was possible for the right to do it...They certainly had no interest in trying until recently.

What’s happening is exactly the same the shoe is just on the other foot. If you go back to those who are criticizing Trump Trump and those defending him and just switch it to Biden and those defending Biden it sounds exactly the same

You sound surprised -- or worse, like you're telling something that isn't already common knowledge.