Some Dems, not yet Biden, talk of expanding Supreme Court

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The prospect that President Donald Trump and Senate Republicans will fill Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Supreme Court seat before the year is out has ignited a call for major changes on the court, including expanding the number of justices.

Some Democratic senators, who had been averse to increasing the size of the nine-member court, said in the wake of Ginsburg's death that the Republican rush to fill the high court vacancy could be a breaking point.

Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey said on Twitter that if Republicans don't allow the winner of the Nov. 3 presidential election to select the next justice, “we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court.”

But the sudden vacancy also is fueling tensions among Democrats. While some progressives are urging presidential nominee Joe Biden to embrace reforms including adding justices to the court, he has so far resisted embracing such a major change.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/some-dems-not-yet-biden-talk-of-expanding-supreme-court/ar-BB19jq53?li=BBnbcA1&ocid=DELLDHP

[still_one]

1. I wouldn't want him to come out on that right now. It won't buy us anything until after

the election

Markey can say anything he wants, he is in a blue state, and not running for President

We need to get some purple perhaps red states to win

[Raven123]

5. I agree with you.

[ffr]

6. +1

Save the 'what we're going to do' until after.

[Budi]

8. Exactly. Safe to make a statement when you personally aren't in the fight.

Biden is.

He's smart to let this divisive dogwhistle rest, when the stakes are between He & Trump & are at an apex.

Forcing an answer from Biden at this time is bs.
Biden has his next 6 week strategic game plan in order & he's got his particular key points to ready beat Trump like a drum.

I'll trust Joe Biden to run his own campaign & not be sidetracked by the howls of those who aren't standing in his shoes this moment.

Sit tf down.

[lagomorph777]

9. Yup - onboard with that!

[Midnight Writer]

13. Exactly. Keep your powder dry. No point in trumpeting a rallying cry for the Right Wing.

He can make these decisions if he takes office.

[still_one]

14. +++

[BlueTsunami2018]

2. He's too smart to do this.

Just like they won’t get him to say he’ll defund the police. We’re all horrified by what’s coming but we still have to be smart and collected. Let’s win before we start talking about this kind of thing.

[Mike 03]

3. How about we shrink the SCOTUS by two justices, last to enter

first to leave?

I don't think Biden should touch the subject of expanding the court, at least not yet.

[lagomorph777]

10. Defies the Constitution; appointments are for life.

Expanding it doesn't break the Constitution.

[standingtall]

16. Theoretically legislation could be passed to limit the size of the court

but it would be practically impossible. Legislation could be passed to shrink the court from 9 to 7, but we would have to wait for to Justices to die without filling there seats. Problem is republicans are appointing young judges. They would have ample time to take back the Government and repeal such legislation before it ever goes into effect.

[flamin lib]

4. I would entertain expanding the court to 15 justices and restructure it to

resemble circuit courts. Use 5 member panels to hear cases with the option of full court review of 3/2 decisions. The court could hear more cases and cases with 'questionable outcomes' would have oversight. It would also be more difficult for either party to pack the court with partisan judges.

[Doremus]

7. He isn't talking about it because he has no intentions of doing it.

I would bet everything I own that Dems won't get rid of the filibuster and they won't pack the court. Such dramatic change is simply not in their DNA. Biden nor any other (D) power players are suggesting it, only a few progressives.

Realize it now and fight or we're stuck for decades with 1950s social policy. I'm old enough to remember those days and, young people, they weren't fun. You don't want to experience them, believe it.

[Demsrule86]

11. Nonsense. Biden has no choice about the filibuster. And if we can the courts he will.

Stop spreading such nonsense.

[Doremus]

22. You're the one spreading nonsense.

Talking about expanding the court and ending the filibuster as if there's a snowball's chance in hell.

Who in the power base is talking about these radical actions? Not Biden, not Kamala, not anybody. In fact, DiFi has already come out against them.

And then there's the inconvenient fact that, with a 6th conservative on the court, it's an automatic loss for any close election results (think Florida). It's Catch 22. No President Biden, no stacked court and no ended filibuster.

But go ahead and spew the ridiculous notion that all we have to do is let them have their way and we'll miraculously solve everything after the election. Bah.

[Budi]

12. You know this how?

"Such dramatic change is simply not in their DNA. Biden nor any other (D) power players are suggesting it, only a few progressives."

All I needed to read. 🙄

More division from the expected...
You nor them have a claim of ownership to this decision.
Nor does anyone shouting the loudest wedge issue to the media have any clue how a President Biden will handle the SC choice.

He has the most important race of our lifetime to fininsh.
He's got 6 werks to do it.

How bout they just get him Elected 1st before drawing the line with divisive wedge issues that cannot be solved until he is there.

Figures that certain ones would be more focused on division than the one singular task at hand.

Its predictable however sad it is

[Doremus]

20. Division my ass.

It's reality, not pipe dream "let's expand the court" and "end the filibuster." Both things that simply aren't going to be proferred by the current Dem party.

Why is it okay to repeat far-fetched nonsense such as the above (which is being touted by Progressives by the way, you might want to watch it) but divisive to point out the obvious? I think you're being divisive by trying to shove people out of the big tent.

[standingtall]

17. If Biden wants a second term or if Kamala Harris ever wants to be President

Then they better do it.

[Budi]

21. I believe they're concern is in gettting to their 1st term, at the moment.

6 + weeks left to salvage this country from a catastrophic collapse.

The SC decision can't happen until he's President.

Maybe just Vote Biden/Harris & downballot Blue. Get our power back before demanding something he has no power at the moment to fix.

Hindsight~2016 Support of HRC would have given us our SC by now.

Just sayin.

[standingtall]

23. I'm not threatening their 2nd term

I'm just expressing the reality of what's going to happen if they don't repeal the legislative filibuster in their first term.

[Budi]

24. Sure. Ok.

[Bettie]

15. Biden probably shouldn't talk about it

give him the deniability factor for now, but hopefully he's willing to do it.

[Jersey Devil]

18. It would be foolish to create another major issue now

Biden is ahead on all the major issues so he should create a new one now that has the potenitial to backfire against him? I don't think so.

[forthemiddle]

19. Now that is the topic du jour

I am sure it will be asked, point blank, during the debates. I wonder how he will answer it?