You're wrong, of course. The President has the right and authority to commission a study and then to ask Congress to take action to correct any problems that may show up. That includes increasing the number of justices on the bench.
huh? The Constitution "is the Legislative branch"? And then after that it is "then the States"? You need to study something a bit more whether it's the Constitution or it's English Comp. CITATION!!! huh? That's not a sentence and so it communicates nothing. "Pens and pencils and lots of paper." See? Because he is President and you aren't.
I’m watching, his support is fairly high — if people are upset with him doing this but were fine with what Republicans did then they likely are not voting for him in the first place. Republicans are fine with burning the system down — I hope Democrats are preparing to play the same game. This doesn’t just mean adding justices however and the commission is studying many parts of the process and how to make the system less subject to Republican corruption
So Xi created the virus at Biden’s request to help win the election because they knew trump was too much of an imbecile and his base so anti-science that the US would have the worst response in the industrialized world? Fascinating stuff Q.
The people of the United States voted. Your side isn’t that of the United States. It is the minority that wishes to force the rest of the nation to bend to your will.
Ah, the ole anti-science rhetoric. The same people that were screaming about the science, yet when science goes against the narrative, i.e. children going back to school, the science isn't part of the equation. And let's not forget when Fauci was against the science of mask before he was for the science of mask....
I couldn’t care less what Fauci says, but you do know medical understanding is constantly evolving — yes? Science and medicine seek the truth, they are not the truth. Scientific observation shows we did something wrong because we had a far worse infection and death rate than other nations even accounting for the nursing home murders. So yes. Anti-science
Or..... The radical locks downs created an absolutely travesty of excessive deaths.. Yep, science rules! Death by Lockdown
Who said this, "a president is elected for four years not three" ? So, is there a limit somewhere in the last year that you cannot put a justice on the Supreme Court? We are told that 269 days is plenty of time but 46 days is not enough time. What is the limit? Does the limit change depending on the party in charge? Who makes these fake rules that we are supposed to govern by?
The lockdowns in the United States were inept compared to the rest of the civilized world. Did those nations have the same level of “excess deaths” as we did? If not, what did they do different (hint: massive direct economic programs)
I think the commission is a very good idea. It would be odd to suppose the SCOTUS is the one and only perfect institution in our governmental apparatus. That means identifying its structural or systems based problems is the first step to identifying solutions. The commission is an avenue to brainstorm solutions, compromises etc. Why not?
That was before we knew the virus could be spread from asymptomatic people. Science changes and your opinion should reflect those changes right? Or would you rather have Fauci double down on his first recommendation no matter how many people die because "at least he didn't change his mind!"
Yes. That is exactly what they prefer. Changing your positions at any time is a sign of weakness or dishonesty to them even if new information becomes available
This study recently done to understand the effectiveness of mask wearing actually coincides with Fauci's initial stance so the science did not change, but merely the narrative! It's also why you are seeing riots in Europe as the lock down's are doing more harm to their society than the governments control. Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers A Randomized Controlled Trial Conclusion: The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection.
“The Commission’s purpose is to provide an analysis of the principal arguments in the contemporary public debate for and against Supreme Court reform, including an appraisal of the merits and legality of particular reform proposals,” says a White House press release. “The topics it will examine include the genesis of the reform debate; the Court’s role in the Constitutional system; the length of service and turnover of justices on the Court; the membership and size of the Court; and the Court’s case selection, rules, and practices.” https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-commissions-the-supreme-court-11618008493?mod=opinion_major_pos1 Do get up to speed with better news sources That is none of Biden's or the executive branch business. Pens, paper, staff, computer services and IT, are members getting paid for their service, printing, archiving, etc. etc. etc.
You are wrong of course because I have not said the President doesn't have a "right", strawman. And it is Congress that has this authority and if THEY believe they need to hold proper hearings then THEY can do so and of course limit it to their one role, deciding how many will serve on the court not the "and the Court’s case selection, rules, and practices."
Biden and the left should cool and stop this nonsense and take care of that for which he IS responsible and IS in charge and HAS the authority. And what possibly could I be hiding, only a person who cannot sustain their own arguments has to make them up for the other side.
I think the court can protect itself and if that is the case compromise with whom? His the Chief Justice who is in charge of the co-equal branch of government been consulted, been called to sit on the commission? This has nothing to do with the Executive Branch. This is nothing but a ploy to get more seats on the bench so Biden can appoint enough to give a left leaning majority.
You do know "On Friday, President Joe Biden issued an executive order establishing a 36-member commission to study the possibility of Supreme Court reform. Biden devised this approach on the campaign trail to avoid taking a position on court expansion—a move that frustrated staunch advocates of reform but smartly defused the question as an election issue. Oddly, however, the president has not asked the commission that he has now formed to give him any actual recommendations on the extremely pertinent question of how to deal with a judiciary that Republicans have captured through unprecedented partisan obstruction. Instead, he asked his commission to produce a report analyzing the history and legality of proposed Supreme Court reforms, as well as the “principal arguments” for and against these proposals, which he will then use to chart a course forward.... ...The first red flag here is the commission’s task: not to produce action items or recommendations, but to study issues that have already been studied to death. Congress repeatedly altered the size of the Supreme Court throughout the 19th century—sometimes for overtly partisan purposes: In the 1860s, for instance, Republican lawmakers added (and subtracted) seats to dilute the influence of Southern Democratic justices. Biden has asked the commission to look beyond expansion to other potential reforms, including “the length of service and turnover of justices” (which means term limits) and “the Court’s case selection, rules, and practices” (which means requiring or prohibiting the court from hearing certain cases). It is unclear whether the commission can add a meaningful gloss to any of these topics, which have already been debated in law reviews and op-ed pages and, increasingly, Congress itself..." https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/04/joe-biden-supreme-court-reform-commission.html This is ONLY an excuse to get Congress to put more bodies on the bench so a Democrats can appoint them to offset Trump's picks.
That study was done in a community where mask use was not common. The study also did not test for source control i.e. whether or not wearing a masks could prevent infecting another person, which is the whole point really. Masks are more designed to prevent your own droplets from spreading to a non-infected person, not necessarily preventing the droplets from entering through the mask from the environment. So a more relevant primary endpoint would have been whether or not wearing masks prevented the infection of other people. When we talk about asymptomatic transmission, we mean a person who is infected and doesn't know it, but can pass on the virus. The argument has never been that masks are intended to prevent a sick person from coughing and infecting you. For instance, if you visit a TB infected patient in the hospital, both you and the patient are required to wear masks, not just you.
Except the commissions issues or options are not limited to increasing or decreasing the number of justices. Even if it were, if the size of the court has been altered repeatedly in the 19th, and the republic somehow survived through to the 21st century, it stands to reason that its not some nation destroying act to look at its size again. I will look at whatever they study and come to conclusions after they did so, not prior to the first meeting.