Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We prefer Gorsuch, and we are happy the decision properly followed the election.
I support the Biden Rule.
Funny you bumped this old thread. Just yesterday I wrote the following about the SC on a thread asking if people would still vote for Trump knowing what they know now:
"The Supreme Court. There were D's and progressives who despised Trump, but didn't like Hillary. One big reason for their reluctant support of Hillary was having a SC for decades that would be liberal, particularly if she served 8 years. otoh, those who wanted a more conservative, or at least not automatically liberal SC wanted Trump to have those nominations. I remember the usual suspects on this forum who both mocked McConnell and gave him a big for not holding hearings on Garland because they were sure it meant Hillary would win and nominate more liberal judges than Garland, more in the Sotomayor, Ginsburg mold. I didn't want her to have those nominations. That alone was adequate reason for me, if the 2016 election had a do-over, to still prefer Trump.
The economy & market go up and down; nobody knows what to do about NK; lying and ethics were a wash; healthcare is a guessing game; no prez can resolve the race issue; neither party wants to stop illegal immigration; etc..
Except for the rare SC Justice who shocks the nominating prez, you pretty much get what you expect for decades."
If you read what the Founding Father's said, you would KNOW that they are NOT and that is how they wanted it to be.
We ended up with the Congress being least important and SC most important, instead of the other way around as was intended. The prez is in the middle, where intended. Some might argue the prez is more powerful than the SC, but either way, Congress became a joke compared with the other branches.
We ended up with the Congress being least important and SC most important, instead of the other way around as was intended. The prez is in the middle, where intended. Some might argue the prez is more powerful than the SC, but either way, Congress became a joke compared with the other branches.
We ended up with the Congress being least important and SC most important, instead of the other way around as was intended. The prez is in the middle, where intended. Some might argue the prez is more powerful than the SC, but either way, Congress became a joke compared with the other branches.
You need to explain your position.
Congress STILL passes laws and can override a presidential veto which is ALL they were intended to do.
Congress STILL passes laws and can override a presidential veto which is ALL they were intended to do.
The SC and prez have expanded their power at the expense of Congress. Look at Obamacare. The SC decides that state doesn't mean state and penalty means tax. One of Scalia's best quips was calling Obamacare, SCOTUScare. Or same sex marriage. Congress passed DOMA; SC says Nope. Look at everything from Civil Rights to War Powers to State/Religion relations to Campaign Financing, and it's the SC, not Congress with the final say on the direction of the country.
The prez through EO's, memoranda, impoundment of funds, executive agency regulations, and other practical devices can render laws meaningless. For the most part, Trump's first 8 months are full of those techniques, not Congress doing things.
I think Eisenhower said that nominating Earl Warren for the SC was the worst mistake he ever made. There's no guarantee a nominee will rule as the prez anticipates. But with another 2, 3, or 4 nominees possible [Ginsburg, Kennedy, Breyer, Thomas], those appointments will shape the nation's future more than the passing fancies of any particular Congress.
btw, overriding a veto is a check and balance, not really a measure of practical power, as the minimal success of overrides proves.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
for not holding hearings on Garland because they were sure it meant Hillary would win and nominate more liberal judges than Garland, more in the Sotomayor, Ginsburg mold. I didn't want her to have those nominations. That alone was adequate reason for me, if the 2016 election had a do-over, to still prefer Trump. 
and 
all the time.
