There is a viable compromise on the court packing issue.

Zorro · Apr 18, 2021

"How Much Does The Current Structure Benefit Us?": AOC Questions Role Of An Independent Supreme Court In Defending Court-Packing

The Left's "politics of rage has created a new age of berserkers, warriors revered for their blind destructive fury... willingness to lay waste to any structure or institution on the path to victory."

blood-lust politics was on display this week when House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., Sen. Ed Markey , D-Mass, and others unveiled a raw court packing bill to add four new justices to the Supreme Court to give liberals a one-justice majority.

Not to be outdone, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. not only endorsed the court-packing scheme but question the very basis for Marbury v. Madison — the case laying the foundation for the Supreme Court in our constitutional system.

“How much does the current structure benefit us? And I don’t think it does.”
Click to expand...

Judicial review is the very thing that prevents authoritarian rule.

In the 1803 Marbury decision, Chief Justice John Marshall wrote that “[t]he very essence of civil liberty certainly consists in the right of every individual to claim the protection of the laws whenever he receives an injury.” Part of that right to review is the challenging of unconstitutional federal laws. Marshall noted that “[t]he powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written.” He then wrote most famously: “It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is.”
Click to expand...

Ochlocracy - mob rule

“tyranny of the majority.” Mill explains that “the will of the people […] practically means the will of the most numerous or the most active part of the people.” Framers like John Adams referred to this form of tyranny and it is precisely what motivated figures like George Mason to demand a Bill of Rights protecting individual rights against the government – and the will of the majority. You do not need a First Amendment to protect popular speech. It is designed to protect the unpopular views of an insular and even despised minority.

These structural changes are being pushed through despite an election that left the Senate in a 50-50 tie and the House with a now two-seat majority. It is really “tyranny of the mere majority.”
Click to expand...

RodB · Apr 18, 2021

Dayton3 said: ↑

The Democrats proposed today expanding the U.S. Supreme Court by four justices. Obvious the goal being to pack the Supreme Court with four Biden nominees which one could assume would compensate for the two extra justices that President Trump managed to appoint.

While it might seem like this is an all or nothing proposal, it can be tweeked to become a viable compromise.

1) Expand the court by two justices effective in 2022. This gives President Biden and the liberals a guaranteed two Supreme Court seats to fill.

2) Expand the court by another two justices effective in 2025. This would mean that although it is possible that Biden would have two more justices to appoint, it is equally possible a Republican president would get to fill those seats. Or that even if Biden (or another Democrat) was president in 2025, that the GOP might control the Senate giving the GOP input into the filling of the seats.

While expanding the court is NOT my preference, I think this shows that even on the most difficult issue, compromise is doable. Opinions?
Click to expand...

This just proves the adage that compromise is a terribly overrated concept. Their is no need to compromise at all, though it might mitigate the political loss slightly doing what you suggest.

RodB · Apr 18, 2021

61falcon said: ↑

An even better idea would be to appoint justices based on something other than their perceived political leanings and ideology.
Click to expand...

Maybe so, but it'll never happen.

Log in or Sign up

There is a viable compromise on the court packing issue.

Zorro Well-Known Member

RodB Well-Known Member Donor

RodB Well-Known Member Donor

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

There is a viable compromise on the court packing issue.

Zorro Well-Known Member

RodB Well-Known Member Donor

RodB Well-Known Member Donor

Share This Page

Useful Searches