It's not just elections it's guys at the coffee shop, it's guys trying to gun down congressmen and women playing baseball it's about guys blowing up a federal building
Thank God we don't have anymore of those story's by a overzealous federal government, bundy put an end to it.
Roberts smells too much like a loyal Democrat to many of us who watch the court. Barrett will clean things up.
Just reading about the girl scouts canceling there endorsement of her.. Why is the left so against women??
Not going to happen. Biden announced that he will appoint a commission to recommend Judicial branch reforms. 1) Commissions are where ideas go to die. 2) The commission is supposed to report to Biden in six months. Fully one eighth of his time in office will be gone by then. 3) By the time 6 months have gone by A) Americans will still have health care insurance. B) Abortion will still be legal in the U.S. C) Homosexual rights will be unchanged. 4) Due to the above, the impetus to expand the Supreme Court will be effectively nonexistent.
I've been a swing voter all my life, voting for who I think was the best candidate regardless of party which at times included voting third party when I thought both major party candidates were disgusting, i.e. 2016. If there is anything could make this 73 year old join one of the major parties, it would be packing or adding justices to the SCOTUS for gaining 100% political advantages for that party. Leave the SCOTUS as it is. As for an amendment to the constitution, I'd leave the president to determine who he would appoint, but I would add that confirmation would take a two thirds vote in the senate for confirmation. No more nuclear option. Have the justice, the nominee be acceptable to at least some of the minority party's members. This would ensure more moderate justices are appointed if at least some of the minority party has to approve them. I have no problem with life long appointments and would be against a retirement age. What a retirement age would do is to have a president choose much younger, less experienced, judges so they could serve longer.
You know those abuses wouldn't have been possible without first having ex-democratic senate majority leader Harry Reid first use of and setting the precedence for future use of the nuclear option. Without Reid's first use it would still take 60 votes for cloture, hence no Republican abuses, no Kavanaugh and no Barrett. This situation and abuses used by the GOP was made entirely possible by Reid and the Democrats in the senate. They caused this situation to come about, in a sense they made this situation, the abuses possible. Any outrage or blame should be directly directed toward Harry Reid and the Democrats in the senate at the time. Without Reid's precedence setting first use, none of this would be taking place.
When Democrats lose, the first thing they do - after wiping the tears from their eyes and snot from their noses - is try to change the rules so they don't lose again. Petulance: The quality of being childishly sulky or bad-tempered.
No Supreme Court justice in American history has ever been impeached and removed from office. It isn't going to happen now.
You love that word, Ron. What has she done to deserve impeachment? How about we give her a chance, eh? Most people on team "other," aren't out to get you.
Did you too see live on TV the tank push the barrel into the building, supposedly "tear gas" and pull back out dripping FIRE? I DAMN SURE DID, AS DID MY WIFE AND GROWN DAUGHTER!
Yes keep the SCOTUS as it is with 9, but engrain that number in the Constitution. We are on the verge of that being changed for political purposes and with the threats by the Democrats will legislation already being written by some if the Republicans retain the Senate and get the Congress back with the WH they almost have no choice but to preempt them and a case could be made that Constitutionally just the President and Senate could do so. The amendment needs to be fasttracked and both parties pledging not to submit legislation to increase the number until and Amendment is passed or defeated. The amendment could set a minimum age if that is your worry, 35 the same as the President, but I don't think that is exactly necessary it's never been such a consideration. Barrett is the youngest and she is HIGHLY qualified. And the age limit once in the constitution would then be applied statutorially to the inferior courts.