Jump to content

Senate confirms Justice Handmaid One


Recommended Posts

I'd love to hear differing points of view, but I think Joe Biden's non existent answers on packing the Supreme Court and ending the filibuster are unacceptable.

 

The voters should know where you stand on an issue, and whether we like that stance or don't. Stop being a bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, osxmatt said:

I'd love to hear differing points of view, but I think Joe Biden's non existent answers on packing the Supreme Court and ending the filibuster are unacceptable.

 

The voters should know where you stand on an issue, and whether we like that stance or don't. Stop being a bitch.

No one cares. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, osxmatt said:

I'd love to hear differing points of view, but I think Joe Biden's non existent answers on packing the Supreme Court and ending the filibuster are unacceptable.

 

The voters should know where you stand on an issue, and whether we like that stance or don't. Stop being a bitch.


I feel like answering the question, regardless of the answer, will hurt him more than help him. There’s no upside; keep on dodging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer depends on what Senate Republicans do honestly. If he answers then that becomes the story and not the ACB confirmation. I don't think the courts get reformed if she is not confirmed though.

 

His no comment is way better than shitting on the left/base which he has no problem doing otherwise, just keep that in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

 

 

 

Perhaps I am missing something because this meme seems to think Justices goes brrrr. Wouldn't the change to the supreme court need bipartisan support? Which means it's DOA because why would repubs go for things that limit their power?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, osxmatt said:

I'd love to hear differing points of view, but I think Joe Biden's non existent answers on packing the Supreme Court and ending the filibuster are unacceptable.

 

The voters should know where you stand on an issue, and whether we like that stance or don't. Stop being a bitch.

 

There is literally not an answer he can give that won't get him into trouble. The dodge is the perfect move. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Zaku3 said:

 

Perhaps I am missing something because this meme seems to think Justices goes brrrr. Wouldn't the change to the supreme court need bipartisan support? Which means it's DOA because why would repubs go for things that limit their power?

Nope, takes an act of congress and signed into law by the president to change the size of the supreme court and complete makeup of the lower courts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Zaku3 said:

 

Perhaps I am missing something because this meme seems to think Justices goes brrrr. Wouldn't the change to the supreme court need bipartisan support? Which means it's DOA because why would repubs go for things that limit their power?

 

As long as the Democrats control the House and Senate, and Biden wins, they could change the Supreme Court to 100 seats and there's nothing the Republicans could do, procedurally. The Democrats would need to eliminate the filibuster first, of course, but I think they are likely to do that anyway since McConnell will abuse it to stall every single thing the Democrats want to do once they win.

 

Honestly, the entire US government needs updating. SCOTUS should be 11 or 13 seats, the House should be increased to 1000+ seats (at a minimum), and Puerto Rico and DC need to be added as states. Will the Republicans counter if they take control of the House, Senate, and Presidency at some point? Sure. But they are already eroding every single convention and norm, so there is no risk in Democrats doing it first to at least postpone the US' fall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

As long as the Democrats control the House and Senate, and Biden wins, they could change the Supreme Court to 100 seats and there's nothing the Republicans could do, procedurally. The Democrats would need to eliminate the filibuster first, of course, but I think they are likely to do that anyway since McConnell will abuse it to stall every single thing the Democrats want to do once they win.

 

Honestly, the entire US government needs updating. SCOTUS should be 11 or 13 seats, the House should be increased to 1000+ seats (at a minimum), and Puerto Rico and DC need to be added as states. Will the Republicans counter if they take control of the House, Senate, and Presidency at some point? Sure. But they are already eroding every single convention and norm, so there is no risk in Democrats doing it first to at least postpone the US' fall. 

 

Eliminating the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929 also mostly fixes the Electoral College. Win-win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a good compromise would be the sitting members of SCOTUS nominate a new member when a vacancy occurs, and the Senate performs their usual advise and consent function as outlined in the Constitution.  A caveat would be that the retiring/dying/whatever judge cannot nominate their own replacement, just the remaining judges. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Joe said:

 

lol the few good things we have in this country are thanks to SCOTUS.

Buckle up, so many good things coming!

 

95be127b-6f4a-42e4-a7a4-59e6f4a8c363-460
WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

Ana Marie Cox: Our conservative supreme court justices are convinced racial discrimination is over. Do they live in America?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, osxmatt said:

I'd love to hear differing points of view, but I think Joe Biden's non existent answers on packing the Supreme Court and ending the filibuster are unacceptable.

 

The voters should know where you stand on an issue, and whether we like that stance or don't. Stop being a bitch.

 

Thing is even asking the question presupposes and tacitly excuses  maladministration on the part of republican leaders. It's inappropriate to ask Biden the question of whether he'd expand the court while republican leaders go unquestioned over their own court packing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Anathema- said:

 

Thing is even asking the question presupposes and tacitly excuses  maladministration on the part of republican leaders. It's inappropriate to ask Biden the question of whether he'd expand the court while republican leaders go unquestioned over their own court packing. 

 

An acceptable response could have been, "The citizens of this country deserve to be represented fairly.  With an ACB confirmation our supreme court would make up an overwhelming conservative majority, and that is not representative of our fine citizens.  I would exercise my power to make sure the SC represents the values of our citizens.". And then throw in some shade about Republicans stonewalling Obama and packing the courts themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Warren court and a few decent rulings thanks to Kennedy joining the liberals are all the good this court has done. Court liberals are what was good, not the institution!

 

The institution would be "ok" at best if all but maybe 3 justices weren't the result of undemocratic/stolen presidential elections, to say nothing of the Senate being a broken institution itself 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

The Warren court and a few decent rulings thanks to Kennedy joining the liberals are all the good this court has done. Court liberals are what was good, not the institution!

 

The institution would be "ok" at best if all but maybe 3 justices weren't the result of undemocratic/stolen presidential elections, to say nothing of the Senate being a broken institution itself 

 

This argument ignores the fact that all three institutions suck, not just SCOTUS. We would be way farther behind as a society without SCOTUS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

I don't disagree but the institution can only be as good as the people in charge

 

I'm just saying, if you want SCOTUS as an institution to be eliminated but leave POTUS and Congress as institutions, you're a literal moron. Not saying you necessarily are saying that, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Joe said:

 

I'm just saying, if you want SCOTUS as an institution to be eliminated but leave POTUS and Congress as institutions, you're a literal moron. Not saying you necessarily are saying that, though.

Fwiw, POTUS needs to be abolished and congress strengthened. More of a Westminster system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Aging is far from a new problem for the Senate, where both parties reward seniority and are reluctant to push their elders aside. Ms. Feinstein’s allies insist she will play her role with dignity and force, and Democrats have quietly put in place plans to keep her at the periphery of the action, leaving public appearances to other party leaders and ensuring that she will rarely be called upon to make unscripted remarks. But rarely has someone with Ms. Feinstein’s limitations been asked to take so prominent a stage in a battle fraught with such political risk.

 

  • Guillotine 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...