General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937. Is this the solution? Add more Justices to SCOTUS?
In the Judiciary Act of 1869 Congress had established that the United States Supreme Court would consist of the Chief Justice and eight associate justices. During Roosevelt's first term the Supreme Court struck down several New Deal measures as being unconstitutional. Roosevelt sought to reverse this by changing the makeup of the court through the appointment of new additional justices who he hoped would rule his legislative initiatives did not exceed the constitutional authority of the government. Since the U.S. Constitution does not define the size of the Supreme Court, Roosevelt pointed out that it was within the power of the Congress to change it. The legislation was viewed by members of both parties as an attempt to stack the court, and was opposed by many Democrats, including Vice President John Nance Garner.[4][5] The bill came to be known as Roosevelt's "court-packing plan".[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Procedures_Reform_Bill_of_1937
Once the Democrats get back into full power of the govt, why can't they simply add more justices to the SCOTUS to counter the bullshit that McConnell and Trump pulled off?
dalton99a
(81,570 posts)Our government has been hijacked by terrorists.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)dlk
(11,576 posts)Wouldn't more justices make court-packing more difficult?
standingtall
(2,787 posts)at the very least as a last resort. We cannot treat this like some sacred cow that we dare not touch,because republicans have been using other tactics to stack the courts in their favor and we are on a path that the only way we are going to stop repukes from making power grabs using the supreme court is for us to get control over the supreme court.
Although I would just increase the bench from 9 to 13. Rs will holler like scalded cats but I doubt if the Ds will complain. Rs have been breaking rules and moving goalposts forever and eff me if I can figure out why we keep acquiescing.
marble falls
(57,204 posts)Yavin4
(35,445 posts)Republicans break the law, legal precedence, collude with foreign powers, end filibusters, etc. to get what they want. How has playing by the rules helped the Dems?
dalton99a
(81,570 posts)Yavin4
(35,445 posts)As it stands right now, the Republican party is thoroughly corrupt, dishonest, mean-spirited, and willing to collude with foreign governments to acquire power. They should but shut out from ever being in power.
standingtall
(2,787 posts)If we were to do this we could overturn all the garbage the right leaning supreme court has passed for the last 40 or 50 years. Sure republicans could get back the government and stack the supreme court in their favor again. We go through a few cycles of this and the country will be so fed up with it that there will be a will to fix it with a constitutional amendment. Such as term limits for supreme court justice or a 60 vote threshold for confirmation in the Senate and I think in the long run it would be a good thing.
onenote
(42,759 posts)FDR couldn't get it through Congress despite the fact that the Democrats had a unbelievable 3/4 majority in Congress, having just won 334 seats in the House and 74 in the Senate. And the bad taste in the public's mouth over the plan persisted, contributing to the Democrats losing 72 seats in the House in 1938.
You may want to risk history repeating itself, but its not a risk the Democrats in Congress are likely to take.
Think about it: if it was an easy thing to do and a good move politically, why wouldn't the Republicans do it now, while they have majorities in both Houses and control the White House?
standingtall
(2,787 posts)First off we do not have a 3/4 majority to lose to begin with. So it is worth taking the risk. We are in a completely different climate now. This can be done with a simple majority all it would require is for all democratic senators to stick together. The only reason why republicans haven't done it is they are afraid we will do it and once we do it we will be able to use the supreme court to ensure that we get through meaningful social programs that people will like making it harder for republicans to get elected.
dalton99a
(81,570 posts)standingtall
(2,787 posts)dalton99a
(81,570 posts)onenote
(42,759 posts)We can't. If we try and fail and then lose control of the House and Senate in 2022, then what?
standingtall
(2,787 posts)In the 30's Democrats were at the ceiling so there was no place to go but down. However it wasn't that big of a political disaster took republicans almost 40 or 50 years to get back to the anything big business wants big business gets meme Eisenhower and even Nixon would be way to moderate for today's republican party plus Democrats did not lose their majority the congress until the 90's. The pressure FDR put on the supreme court forced them to give him more favorable decisions even though he failed to change it's makeup.
Yavin4
(35,445 posts)It's simply not enough to scare people into voting for Democrats. You have to show them that once Dems take power life will get better for everyone.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)...which could implement it with Conservative Justices tomorrow?
Yavin4
(35,445 posts)Two, we have to get away from doing things out of fear of Republican reaction. How we should think is, let's do things that improve the quality of life for everyone in this country and win power because of it.
standingtall
(2,787 posts)they will just suspend they rules when it benefits them and when a Democrat is President use the same rules they suspended to protect themselves.
Because we have to control both houses of Congress and the presidency to accomplish this, we could try winning the presidency and even just the senate in 2020, allow nature in the form of the massive accumulation of fat tissue on Thomas's chest to follow nature's course, get some f'ing discipline in our Senate conference (are you listening blue dogs?) and put someone like Goodwin Liu instead of some appease the middle moderate in Thomas's place. Overnight not only is order restored but atrocities like capital punishment are eliminated.
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)And it would still be only a 5-4 court.
We don't need to change anything. We just need to win in 2020.
standingtall
(2,787 posts)Us winning in 2020 will not mean much if the republican minority decides to run to their majority on the supreme court to declare any policy we try implement unconstitutional. We passed the affordable care act with 60 votes in the Senate and republicans still ran to the supreme court to try and get it overturned. We got lucky that time the next time it will probably be different. What is to stop republicans from taking social security or medicare to the supreme court in the future? The court will only be 5-4 after republicans ram through their nominee before the election. I would not be so sure they don't get another one through before 2020. We are on the brink of losing everything due to republican munipulation of the supreme court time for us to consider taking some risk and go on the offensive.
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)To change the number of justices we need both houses of Congress and the presidency. Now I concede that it is likely that if we take the Senate in 2000, we will maintain control over the House (which we better well win this fall) but it's not a sure thing. We're almost obligated to use our 2018 House win to shut down Trump cold which could affect 2020.
The Court is going to do what it is going to do over the next 2 years. No Dem appointee will retire and I know Ginsberg looks frail, but I have seen her in action first hand a couple of times over the past few years and she is not going down hill physically at least in my opinion.
Thomas, on the other hand, is visibly less healthy. Unless he dies or retires in the next two years, the 2020 winner will replace him.
Right now one of the few political weaknesses we have is that we have done more than our share of whining about how institutions which have existed for over a hundred years are suddenly "unfair" because we don't like how they worked out for us. This solution looks like more of the same and it's not a good look.
As GOAT POTUS Obama said a couple of days ago, it's time to quit moping.
standingtall
(2,787 posts)I firmly expect if we win 2020 we will have all 3 wings. Taking congress only shuts down Trump legislatively for the next 2 years. We not only need to take back the Senate to shut down Trumps court packing, but we would also have to make sure that no conservative Democrat votes to confirm one of his rubber stamp for the right wings nominees, because the best case scenario is we only come away with a thin majority in the Senate after the midterm.
You can be sure if Thomas is ill he will retire before 2020 so Trump can replace him with a right wing judge who is about 40 years old. So even when we get back the Presidency under that scenario we will be stuck with a 5-4 rubber stamp for republicans right wing court for the next 30 or 40 years after Roe Vs Wade has been overturned and national right to work laws have been passed by this court it's going to be a tough sell for us to say to our Demographics yeah we lost those things and others, but stick with us and we might get them back for your grand kids.
This is not simply whining about how institutions have worked for us. Tell me one other time in our history where the institution of the Senate functioned in a way that it refused to even let a sitting President have a vote for his judicial nominee for the supreme court?
Democrats need stop being afraid of what looks bad or losing everything at once while republicans systematically take everything away from Democrats piece by piece until there is nothing left. Democrats better wake up and start fighting back or not one policy from Barrack Obama's administration will be left in place or any other Democratic President for that matter.
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)I disagree that much. Your urgency is well warranted and I share it.
For absolutely sure we need to get serious the minute we take back control. You recognize that. Decorum is for losers.