HOUSE AND SENATE DEMOCRATS PLAN BILL TO ADD FOUR JUSTICES TO SUPREME COURT

Why is 9 better than 13?

Why is 9 better than 7?

Who made 9 the magical number?

 

I am betting Breyer does so in the next 3 years. Thomas would have if Trump had won, but now he will hold on hoping for a change in 2024

 

Exactly this will just become a war. Or the Republicans could retake power and lower the number back to 9 kicking the 4 appointed by Biden off the bench. Of course that would present a constitutional crisis as there is no constitutional provision about what to do when that number is lowered.

 

Congress decades ago and as Ginsberg said it has proven to be the appropriate number.

YOU want the change so YOU explain why 13 is better than 9.

 

Because it allows Biden to appoint 4 liberal justices to the court
They have no other reason.

 

How? If it is 7 - 6 and two of the seven retire............ if it is 9 - 8 and two retire.........wouldn't 17 be even more stable?

 

Well, one thought about that is that with more justices, it's less likely that one party is going to have an oversize effect on how the Supreme Court leans on certain issues.

The real issue here is the Supreme Court being turned into another political football, of course, and that's on McConnell and the other Republicans who have become rank hypocrites.

No, McConnell said that.

 

I do not want to change it, I am actually neutral on the topic.

Which is why I asked the question

 

Fist, you know he was just following Harry Reid's lead.
Second, thank you for the admission that the desire to move from 9 to 13 justices has nothing to do with any of the things the left says is does and has everything to do with getting the current court of the way of the leftist agenda.

 

From the news conference they held they plan on going after the filibuster in order to pass this. Of course, if Biden stuck to what he said when he was a Senator he could always veto the bill once it gets to his desk. Slim chance he'll do so.

 

The Democrats can easily disprove those who accuse them of their (obvious, hyperpartisan) attempt to pack the court (as nothing other than a means to advance their agenda) by allowing the GOP membership of the to choose the 1st and the 3rd justice added.
Implicit in this agreement is that both sides will confirm the nominee of the other.
Deal?

 

Harry Reid did not change the rules for appointing SCOTUS justices. McConnell did that and he absolutely failed to follow his own rules and standards when it was convenient for him, and of course that lick spittle Lindsey Graham and other Republican senators on board as well.

So yeah, let's add justices to the SCOTUS and undo McConnell's abuses. Biden doesn't want to do it (he is trying to work with these faithless, hypocritical Republicans and doesn't want a fight over the Supreme Court), but after what Republicans have pulled, it's justified.

 

Address actual historical Republican court-packing before you worry about hypothetical Democratic court-packing.

 

The dems shouldnt have lost the Senate.

 

What did Harry change, and how does this not mean McConnell did not simply follow the lead?

As I said:
"When the rules are in our way, we change them!".
- Democrats
Glad you agree.

 

The Republicans have never increased the size of the court for the purpose of moving forward an agenda.
Good of you to admit this is the reason the Dems hope to do so.

 

They don't have the votes to get rid of the filibuster either.

 

"...if I were a Republican and this goes through adding 4 new seats to the SCOTUS, once I regained power, the senate and the presidency, I'd add 10 more justices to the SCOTUS."

Uh no. This is an all stakes game in which the goal is to make sure Republicans don't get back in power. They are pulling out all the stops because they don't anticipate a Republican winning the White House again, and frankly neither do I.

"It's stuff like this that makes me wish I hadn't voted for Biden. I really disliked Trump and his obnoxious and very rude ways."

It's comments like this that really make me facepalm at the ways of the never-Trump mind. The Democrats told us all last year what they were going to do, and now that they're doing it, you're shocked, shocked.

Oh well, at least no more mean tweets. It was worth ending the Republic over.

 

Sure but a few Justices here, a few there, and concepts like "constitutional" will just be gathering dust in the history books.

 

You are inaccurate as regards McConnell. He had said no SCOTUS confirmation in the last year of a President not of the party of the Senate majority. That was not the case in 2020.

 

I didn't say they were very bright. I can only hope the MSM doesn't push this agenda for them. If they do they might be able to get the public to back it and then you'll see the typical RINOs supporting the elimination of the filibuster. They would rather have a seat at the table even if it's just crumbs they'll be getting.

 

No Repub will vote to get rid of the filibuster.

 

Article I, Section 8, Clause 17.

The seat of government has to be a federal district, not residing in a State, so in order to grant DC statehood, you would need to establish another 10 mile square federal district to be the US capital, or...constitutional amendment.

Or just get a few new SC Justices in to make the constitutional issues irrelevant.

 

I wouldn't have thought any of them would ever vote to impeach one of their own either. But they did. Much of the framework behind this push is being built around how much Trump damaged our Democracy. There are some RINOs that believe that charge and might be convinced that in order to undo the damages he caused it might be necessary to do away with the filibuster. Never say never is what I once heard said.

 

Voting to impeach Trump was a perfectly sound thing to do. There is no connection between that and an attempt to pack the SCOTUS.