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.
When Anthony Kennedy decided to retire, it represented the stepping down of the most powerful man in the country. I didn't see any news coverage pointing that out, but it was true.
Roberts is still somewhat of a swing vote, so now he becomes 'most powerful.' If RBG retires before 2020, the SCOTUS becomes 6-3 conservative, and Roberts' swing status is nullified. Caveat--there is always the possibility of another David Souter, who was appointed by HW Bush, but turned out to be more of a liberal.
2019 will, no doubt, bring about another SC opening to backfill.
Clarence Thomas might just retire in 2019. He turned 70 in June. But that would just replace one conservative with another. RBG is 85, and Breyer is 80. Alito is 68. None of the others are close to retirement age.
No doubt RBG and Breyer will try with all they've got to hang on until 2020.
The big monkey wrench is if Democrats win the Senate this Nov. Thomas might have to consider retiring right away to get confirmation through the lame duck Senate. It is possible that Dems might decide to block all confirmations after Jan 2019. I think it would risk major voter backlash, but there's a whole lot at stake in SCOTUS confirmation these days. However, Dems likely won't win the Senate, at least until 2020.
We have seen time and again the courts overturning Trump's decrees. Yes.
Gosh, you are so one sided and partisan. Trump has only been turned over by individual district judges, typically for partisan reasons.
The only time his policy went before the scotus, he won.
The same cannot be said for Obama who was rebuked the the scotus several times.
We have seen time and again the courts overturning Trump's decrees. Yes.
Obama, your dictator with a pen, was overturned more than any other president. It's no wonder you liberals oppose a justice who follows the Constitution.
Wrong. We have 3 distinct branches of gov't in DC, plus SC, which is independent of them. We also have local government, too.
Trump controls everything because the rest of the Republicans rolled over. Ryan never wanted the speaker job. McConnell is an ego maniac with a sever conflict of interest, and Trump owns the new Supreme court.
Theoretically, if the court worked together, their rule could be practically absolute.
Even if you look at your list of presidential powers...
"A president can launch cruise missiles, grant anyone a get out of jail free pass, negotiate with other countries, or have the FBI go through your life with a fine toothed comb."
The court could easily rule all of these things unconstitutional. They could say launching cruise missiles is an act of war and thus requires a Declaration of War from Congress(and requires that declaration of war be against an actual country, not an ideology). They could put limits on the president's ability to pardon. And they could certainly say the acts of the FBI are unconstitutional(right to privacy, due-process, etc).
I will say this though about the Supreme Court. It is definitely the branch of government with the highest IQ. They are too smart to make the court appear too political, because it would turn the people against it.
Maxine Waters will never be on the Supreme Court, not simply because she doesn't have a legal background, but because she is an idiot.
People are already against it. Two serial sexual predators is two too many. Receiving sexual pleasure from the suffering of women is sick. Way to go Republicans. A couple of gems ya got there.
When one party controls the federal branches there are no checks and balances.
Then that's when it's time for the American people to exercise their second amendment, grab their gun and fight back. It's why I voted for Trump and hoped he would get some conservative leaning judges to rein in these gun control democrats.
No, because presidents can still issue executive orders. I would put term limits on judges, and strictly limit the use of executive orders by any president. I also tend to agree with nodpete... republican judges go by the constitution.. maybe gay marriage should simply be left up to the states? Liberal judges tend to rule by what "feels good" and not what the constitution, which wants to leave most issues up to the states, tends to say. If a person doesn't like the laws in one state, they can always move to another.
Then that's when it's time for the American people to exercise their second amendment, grab their gun and fight back. It's why I voted for Trump and hoped he would get some conservative leaning judges to rein in these gun control democrats.
This more than anything!!
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.
