Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Supreme Court; stacking?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    2 states: NJ and confusion
    Posts
    44,053

    Default Supreme Court; stacking?

    There is a problem with stacking the court, as there's no guarantee dems will get to fill the new seats.

    IMO, it should take something more than a simple majority to put a judge on a bench.

    I also believe that more justices on the high court would make any single seat less important politically.

    I also believe that recent nominees lied under oath to get their seats on the court, and wish they'd be held accountable for that.
    "Banning books and not guns seems backwards. Can't think of anyone ever shot by a book

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Posts
    13,202

    Default Re: Supreme Court; stacking?

    Repugnicans used to whine about "the Liberal agenda when Dems had a majority. Now the Repug majority on the USSC is pushing their agenda. What two-faced bas--rds!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    59,414

    Default Re: Supreme Court; stacking?

    Why don't you join the 21C and appoint them on merit?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    2 states: NJ and confusion
    Posts
    44,053

    Default Re: Supreme Court; stacking?

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    Why don't you join the 21C and appoint them on merit?
    That wouldn't be cheating. Many Americans seem to believe in cheating.

    My point is if the court had more justices, no one seat would be so politically important. If it took something more than a simple majority, that would also help get less extreme justices.
    "Banning books and not guns seems backwards. Can't think of anyone ever shot by a book

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Kitty Hawk, NC
    Posts
    12,169

    Default Re: Supreme Court; stacking?

    Quote Originally Posted by John Smith View Post
    If it took something more than a simple majority, that would also help get less extreme justices.
    You might rethink that. That process would allow a lower court decision to stand.
    Life is complex.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    2 states: NJ and confusion
    Posts
    44,053

    Default Re: Supreme Court; stacking?

    Quote Originally Posted by Too Little Time View Post
    You might rethink that. That process would allow a lower court decision to stand.
    You like extreme justices?
    "Banning books and not guns seems backwards. Can't think of anyone ever shot by a book

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    71,411

    Default Re: Supreme Court; stacking?

    Well it's been a political organisation for some time. Every decision will be suspect.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    62,297

    Default Re: Supreme Court; stacking?

    'Packing the court' was the original term when FDR threatened to do it in 1937. Here's a review of the history; the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •