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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-30-2021, 01:12 PM
 
Location: Orange County, CA
2,367 posts, read 909,441 times
Reputation: 2301

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbythegreat View Post
Adding extra justices to the bench in order to control the outcome of cases would destroy the entire branch of government by removing their check on the legislative branch.

If you set the precedent that you can just add justices to courts every time you need a certain ruling, why wouldn't you do that to every court so that there would be no de facto oversight at all? Once you start down that road, it'll be too late by the time you realize what a terrible place it leads to.
Agree.

In 2014 Obama packed the DC Circuit court to defeat challenges to his ACA. This was made possible by Harry Reid removing the Senate filibuster for judicial nominees. Obama hand-packed Pillard, Millet, Wilkins.

These types of Democrat tactics have long term consequences. It destabilized our governmental structure.

Ilhan Omar says "we have the Senate, the House, and the Presidency, we should stop negotiating and end the filibuster". This is Muammar Quaddafi type thinking. Omar is not well educated, she does not understand the government structure designed by the Founding Fathers. And she's not the only Democrat pushing for a banana republic style power grab.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-30-2021, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Michigan
5,654 posts, read 6,217,411 times
Reputation: 8243
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbythegreat View Post
Adding extra justices to the bench in order to control the outcome of cases would destroy the entire branch of government by removing their check on the legislative branch.

If you set the precedent that you can just add justices to courts every time you need a certain ruling, why wouldn't you do that to every court so that there would be no de facto oversight at all? Once you start down that road, it'll be too late by the time you realize what a terrible place it leads to.
In my post I mentioned this and wondered if that was what you are referencing. And as I noted there, I disagree with it. But that does not impact the actual structure of the system and is only applicable to the Supreme Court, which hears a tiny, tiny number of appeals. I was wonderign if there was something other than this impacting courts generally that I may have missed. I'm glad to hear there apparently isn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2021, 06:22 AM
 
59,059 posts, read 27,306,837 times
Reputation: 14285
Quote:
Originally Posted by uggabugga View Post
another blow against zhoe's racist totalitarianism.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/ap...vid-relief-law
This is why it was so important to bet MORE repub nominated judges on the courts.

"The appellate judge who wrote the majority opinion is Amul Thapar. He made history when, in 2008, he became the first-ever South Asian judge appointed to the U.S. federal bench after being selected by then-President George W. Bush."

President Trump put over 200 NEW judges on the courts.

The dem control over the courts is dead for now, and I believe we will see a LOT MORE of the dems non-Constitutional "junk" overturned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2021, 06:27 AM
 
59,059 posts, read 27,306,837 times
Reputation: 14285
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident View Post
The nutty 9th Circus likely would have ruled the other way.
"
"[Daniel] Bress’s confirmation gives [President] Trump his seventh judge on the 9th Circuit, altering the historically liberal bench." #MAGA #KAG #TrumpPence2020
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2021, 06:30 AM
 
59,059 posts, read 27,306,837 times
Reputation: 14285
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbythegreat View Post
Adding extra justices to the bench in order to control the outcome of cases would destroy the entire branch of government by removing their check on the legislative branch.

If you set the precedent that you can just add justices to courts every time you need a certain ruling, why wouldn't you do that to every court so that there would be no de facto oversight at all? Once you start down that road, it'll be too late by the time you realize what a terrible place it leads to.
"Adding extra justices to the bench"

FDR tried it and LOST. Even though by the end of his presidency, EVERY judge on the SC was one of HIS nominees.

Which is why so many of his Socialist programs got passed.

When biden was Senator it was brought up and joe talked AGAINST it.

NOW, he is for it!
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.

© 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