Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should the Dems pack the court if they take back the Senate?
Yes 28 20.74%
No 107 79.26%
Voters: 135. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-19-2020, 07:52 PM
 
30,065 posts, read 18,670,668 times
Reputation: 20884

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball86 View Post
Mitch stole a SC seat from Obama and broke all the Rules to give Trump all his judges I'd urge the Dems to pack the court and get rid of the filibuster.

Chucky get it done
The democrats set a new prescedent in doing EVERYTHING, even if illegal or unethical, possible to stop a nomination in the Kavanaugh hearings.

Now the democrats demand "fairness"?

Trump has shown the dems, unlike RINOs before him, that he will fight back against liberal intimidation and dirty tricks with the very same tactics.

It is refreshing to have a POTUS who is not afraid to use democrat tricks against them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-19-2020, 08:16 PM
 
Location: Maryland
7,814 posts, read 6,392,163 times
Reputation: 9974
Go for it, then Republicans can then streamline the ‘advise and consent’ process to confirm dozens of judges to the SC per day
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2020, 09:18 PM
 
17,440 posts, read 9,271,173 times
Reputation: 11907
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball86 View Post
No where in the constitution does it say the Court is limited to 9 justices.
I’m pretty sure it’s right next to the Section that says a Death Bed Wish by a dying US Supreme Court Justice is Law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2020, 10:00 PM
 
Location: Houston
3,163 posts, read 1,726,240 times
Reputation: 2645
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenBouy View Post
The circumstances aren’t identical since Trump is not at his term limit.
He most certainly would be if he is not re-elected. You are splitting hairs by insinuating that it’s only because Obama could not be re-elected due to term limits. If that’s the case, why did none of the Repub senators reference that fact when they came out against allowing a hearing in 2016?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2020, 10:02 PM
 
Location: Arizona
6,104 posts, read 2,725,398 times
Reputation: 5884
Well Mitch stole one seat so the Dems should at least add 1 more to makeup for Garland.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2020, 10:09 PM
 
Location: Houston
3,163 posts, read 1,726,240 times
Reputation: 2645
Quote:
Originally Posted by xray731 View Post
I love how libs think - just keep adding more until things are in your favor - forget about the history of the country and how things were originally et up. Now if you said these judges should have term limits - then I agree.
We have had 9 Justices only since the 1860s, still a long time. But, 9 was not the original number and the # of justices is set by law, not enshrined in the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2020, 02:32 AM
 
Location: Various
9,049 posts, read 3,523,517 times
Reputation: 5470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball86 View Post
Well Mitch stole one seat so the Dems should at least add 1 more to makeup for Garland.
How do you think Garland was going to be confirmed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2020, 03:49 AM
 
Location: Phoenix
30,371 posts, read 19,162,886 times
Reputation: 26264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball86 View Post
Mitch stole a SC seat from Obama and broke all the Rules to give Trump all his judges I'd urge the Dems to pack the court and get rid of the filibuster.

Chucky get it done
If the Demonicrats pack the USSC, the Repubs will overpack it the next time they get the majority...you know that right? This is 3rd world thinking (which fits right in with Dems mentality).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2020, 05:17 AM
 
9,639 posts, read 6,018,049 times
Reputation: 8567
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
The democrats set a new prescedent in doing EVERYTHING, even if illegal or unethical, possible to stop a nomination in the Kavanaugh hearings.

Now the democrats demand "fairness"?

Trump has shown the dems, unlike RINOs before him, that he will fight back against liberal intimidation and dirty tricks with the very same tactics.

It is refreshing to have a POTUS who is not afraid to use democrat tricks against them.
If you weren’t so blind you would’ve noticed during the hearings kavanaugh showed he doesn’t have the temperament to be a SC judge.

Kavanaugh not being confirmed doesn’t mean there wouldn’t have been a conservative leaning judge appointed, just means it wasn’t kavanaugh and the senate did their job of finding a better fit. There have been a slew of unfit judges appointed lately, ie mcconnels choir boy who’s never taken a case to trial is somehow fit to run them.

Back to the OP: if they push through an appointment and don’t wait till next year absolutely. If they wait, absolutely not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2020, 05:32 AM
 
12,039 posts, read 6,570,692 times
Reputation: 13981
Quote:
Originally Posted by legalsea View Post
Let us be clear: the Constitution is utterly silent on how many Justices will be on the Court. It was the Judiciary Act of 1869 that set the number at 9. Congress can, of course, pass a bill to increase the number. FDR tried, but Congress did not agree.

Senator Rubio once spoke of introducing a Constitutional Amendment to fix the number at nine. Nothing happened.

The Congress can, in theory, reduce the number of justices. If they reduce to, say, they cannot fire any sitting justice, but as justices die or retire, no replacement can be made, until 7 is reached.
Thank you for explaining this.
Am I correct in understandingthen that it would take a Congressional vote to expand or reduce the SC seats?
And does that have to be only a simple majority vote?
And would comgress have to overturn the Judiciary Act first?
Thanks
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:28 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top