Biden signs executive order on Supreme Court reform commission

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by cd8ed, Apr 9, 2021.

  1. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,834
    Likes Received:
    19,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/09/biden-supreme-court-reform-commission-480582
    President Joe Biden signed an executive order on Friday empaneling a commission to examine possible reforms to the Supreme Court and federal judiciary, making good on a campaign trail promise sparked by his predecessor's tilting of the federal bench.

    Biden himself has said he’s “not a fan” of so-called court-packing — adding additional seats to the Supreme Court in order to alter its ideological balance — and held up the commission as a more conscientious approach to studying the issue.



    Many are saying we need to increase the number of justices to match the number of district courts (13) since we have increased the number from the number previously set (9). This would definitely address some of the more recent partisan plays and manipulation. Will this lead to an ever escalating increase to the number of seats and is this a reasonable action to address some questionable actions. One thing this proves — shenanigans beget shenanigans.

    Something does need to be done to preserve the integrity of the court however. As it stands it is too rapidly altered with partisans. The commission will also review structural reforms on nominations, perhaps to prevent refusing to seat a justice for a year (for a two term popular president) and then seating one in a matter of weeks (for a two time impeached and soon to be removed president).
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2021
  2. Market Junkie

    Market Junkie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    Messages:
    2,391
    Likes Received:
    1,921
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wouldn't mind seeing a little PAY BACK for that disgraceful ramming of hard-rightie coney-barrett down our throats DAYS before last year's election...
     
  3. Steve N

    Steve N Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2015
    Messages:
    50,732
    Likes Received:
    62,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Guess who said this? Really, take a guess.

    “I have this strange notion, we are a democracy ... if you can’t get the votes … you can’t [legislate] by executive order unless you’re a dictator. We’re a democracy. We need consensus.”
     
  4. MJ Davies

    MJ Davies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2020
    Messages:
    14,392
    Likes Received:
    13,674
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not well-versed in how this works. Is this something that the next POTUS can just undo or would it remain at X number until it's changed again?
     
    Bowerbird likes this.
  5. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,834
    Likes Received:
    19,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Congress sets the number. It would have nothing to do with a president. More than likely they will be pushing for changes on the manner of nominations to prevent another McConnell stunt.
     
  6. TheGreatSatan

    TheGreatSatan Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2009
    Messages:
    21,271
    Likes Received:
    21,237
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You a big Harry Reid fan?
     
    yabberefugee, ButterBalls and Mrs. b. like this.
  7. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,834
    Likes Received:
    19,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No. But what they did was because of obstruction and refusal to govern. What Republicans did was a power grab and had nothing to do with obstruction on the part of Democrats.
     
  8. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    131,903
    Likes Received:
    30,313
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Since when is this the purview of the Executive branch?

    "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," the White house said in a statement. "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."
    The Executive branch has NO constitutional authority to tell the Judicial Branch howbit will conduct it's business and it's rules and case selection. Did he even bother to appoint the Chief Justice to the commission? And it is the Legislative branch that has the sole power to determine the size of the court, but that's all and that has been settled for decades no need to change it.

    And Biden has been in government for almost 50 years and he has to have another commission to tell him what to think? On almost every issue his go to when asked about issues and policies is he is going to form a commission so he can avoid taking a stand and blaming any results on someone else.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2021
    yabberefugee, glitch and HB Surfer like this.
  9. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    131,903
    Likes Received:
    30,313
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    POTUS has NO say in the matter and the Judicial Branch does not report to him. Where is Chief Justice Roberts voicing his constitutional objection to this attempted power grab?
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2021
    yabberefugee likes this.
  10. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,834
    Likes Received:
    19,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Biden absolutely has the authority to implement a commission to study anything he so desires. He also isn’t telling anyone how to do anything.

    After 50 years in government hopefully Biden has learned that experts hold far more knowledge and understanding than one person, even if they are the president. This is one of the many hundreds of reasons why he was elected.
     
  11. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    131,903
    Likes Received:
    30,313
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What authority does he have over the Judicial Branch? What authority does he have to tell them what cases to take, and how to conduct their busy. They are CO-EQUAL branches one does not run the other. How about the Supreme Court forming a commission so it can reform the Presidency? And thank you for admitting that after 50 years in government Biden still doesn't understand how it works and the Constitution. He certainly seemed to know back when he was TOTALLY and UNEQUICALLY against changing the make up of the court.
     
    glitch likes this.
  12. Andrew Jackson

    Andrew Jackson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2016
    Messages:
    40,533
    Likes Received:
    26,383
    Trophy Points:
    113
    :roflol:

    WRONG.

    As was mentioned earlier in the thread, Biden is free to set up a "Commission to study" anything that he wants.

    And, in this case, it seems clear that (regardless of the Committee's Findings") the Court will stay at 9 Members.

    So, why worry?
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2021
    Marcotic likes this.
  13. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,834
    Likes Received:
    19,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Power grabs are partisan gerrymandering of districts so politicians choose their voters instead of voters choosing the politician or refusing to carry out the duties of congress because you want to pack the courts.

    Creating a commission to improve a process is not a power grab.
     
  14. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,834
    Likes Received:
    19,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What part of the constitution do you believe he is violating? Specific amendment please.

    Again, and I am not sure why this keeps having to be explained, he is not making any changes.
     
    Marcotic and Aleksander Ulyanov like this.
  15. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,834
    Likes Received:
    19,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Because as always, Republicans are worried others will do to them what they do to everyone else.
     
  16. joesnagg

    joesnagg Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2020
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    6,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    A "commission", eh? Reckon someone's pals need some extra pocket change, about all that it'll amount to in the end.
     
  17. Vote4Future

    Vote4Future Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    5,564
    Likes Received:
    2,241
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    UNITY! Never mind!
     
    cyndibru likes this.
  18. Andrew Jackson

    Andrew Jackson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2016
    Messages:
    40,533
    Likes Received:
    26,383
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Great point, cd8ed.
     
    Aleksander Ulyanov likes this.
  19. AmericanNationalist

    AmericanNationalist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2013
    Messages:
    36,415
    Likes Received:
    17,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The real issue here is that Liberals are simply unwilling and incapable of living with a conservative SCOTUS. It's to be expected that we live under a Liberal SCOTUS forever, since the Liberal Way of course is the only way that "progress" is made.(Please sense my internet sarcasm on that garbage take by Liberals.)

    The question to ask Liberals is: Conservatives did live under a Liberal SCOTUS, and held their nose. Why can't the Liberals do the same?
     
    Lil Mike likes this.
  20. TheGreatSatan

    TheGreatSatan Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2009
    Messages:
    21,271
    Likes Received:
    21,237
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The best part about the filibuster is it forces both sides to work together.
     
  21. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,274
    Likes Received:
    1,631
    Trophy Points:
    113
    this is necessary after they allowed trump to lose

    more justices are needed for election fraud
     
    HB Surfer likes this.
  22. Starcastle

    Starcastle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    2,157
    Likes Received:
    1,335
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    She was nominated and voted on. Tough crap you fascist libos do not like it.

    This is our country not some game we are playing to get your idiot heroes more power.
     
  23. Starcastle

    Starcastle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2020
    Messages:
    2,157
    Likes Received:
    1,335
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, it is useful to the party not in power.
     
    TheGreatSatan likes this.
  24. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,834
    Likes Received:
    19,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Can you understand why liberals (or anyone not conservative really) could be upset about how that conservative majority happened?

    Republicans refused to even allow the process to occur with one, citing they should let the people choose, even though the people did — twice.

    The second retired under unusual circumstances

    The third was rushed trough with an election a week away, the people spoke and by a significant margin decided this is not want they wanted.
     
    Marcotic and mdrobster like this.
  25. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,834
    Likes Received:
    19,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And — as per the constitution — congress can add 200 more justices. Yet the same people saying it is “tough” are in this thread whining.

    Strange.
     
    Marcotic and Aleksander Ulyanov like this.

Share This Page