Biden to Address Expanding Supreme Court

[applegrove]

Biden to Address Expanding Supreme Court

October 17, 2020 at 10:37 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard 225 Comments

https://politicalwire.com/2020/10/17/biden-to-address-expanding-supreme-court/

"SNIP...
.

Joe Biden told Fox 2 Detroit that he plans to make his views on expanding the number of justices on the Supreme Court known publicly “in the next several days,” and his comments will be pegged to a vote in the Senate on the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett.

Said Biden: “I’m going to make clear my position in the next several days when they vote on this nominee.”

He added: “I will lay out exactly what my view is.”

......SNIP"

[NoMoreRepugs]

1. If only RePutinicans were held to the same litmus tests.

[applegrove]

3. That is why they are losing. Trump layed bare all the lies and hypocricy.

[sfstaxprep]

2. He's Going To Support Adding Justices

The repubs are going to put Amy in on a mostly party line vote. Probably will end up something like 52-48 or 51-49 at worst.

Then Joe will be able to come out and say that since the repubs saw fit to behave as they did, he would support balancing the court out if he wins.

[applegrove]

4. And some of the Obama's federal court nominees McConnell would not put

forward when Obama was president. They filled the federal court seats at a supersonic clip once Trump was elected. That is court packing as was stopping the Garland so there were only 8 justices for a year.

[BigmanPigman]

5. We can add federal judges, can't we?

Or can we remove some by impeachment. I heard some ideas that suggested the fed judges weren't written in stone and there was a way to balance that out as well as the SCOTUS.

[applegrove]

7. I know nothing about that.I was just saying it goes to the question of who is packing the court.

[Patterson]

8. We need 67 Senators to convict after impeachment.

[BigmanPigman]

9. That's for the judges? Well, then can we add more instead?

[cstanleytech]

19. I believe we can and I also believe we should because otherwise many rulings by those courts will be

viewed as tainted and corrupted by many such as myself.

[cstanleytech]

18. I think he will only do that if they commit total hypocrisy and decide to bring her nomination to

the full senate.
At that point he as well as the Democrats will have little choice but to finally take the gloves off should they regain the majority and increase SCOTUS and maybe even the other federal courts otherwise we will have a tainted and corrupted justice system due to the Republicans.

[greyl]

6. Balancing Supreme Court.

Balancing.

[Duppers]

16. ⬆⬆⬆ THIS is the term we should use.

Thank you, greyl.


🚨▶▶BALANCING◀◀🚨

[andym]

10. He's going to state that the GOP has politicized the court by using political tricks to cheat

to create a biased court.l. At least I hope so. I can see him stating he will seek remedies to depoliticize the court, which may include multiple tactics--including expanding or shrinking the court..

[UTUSN]

11. Don't do it, not prudent. Ana NAVARRO on The View gave the answer: It's up to Congress.

[unblock]

12. I agree. Biden shouldn't say he's for it or against it. There's no win in either answer.

[UTUSN]

13. Whew, when I saw there was a Reply thought i was going to get flamed!1 Thanks

[unblock]

14. Do I do that a lot?

[UTUSN]

20. I reacted to the yellow highlight, not you personally, am just

more used to being Nannied, looked-down-the-nose at, bullied, etc., than to collegiality!1 so

[unblock]

23. Ah, that can happen around here at times.

I can get a little snarky myself, but no disrespect is ever intended. Certainly not toward me you, you're one of the good ones here

[UTUSN]

24. Wow, now I'm 'whelmed! Thanks, not for myself but for who you are!

[Polybius]

25. Isn't it a win if he says he's against it?

He'd look mainstream and probably get more votes.

[unblock]

29. It might demoralize some on our side

And also make it less likely to happen

[mr_lebowski]

15. If he's going to say something he should just say 'it'll be up to Congress' ...

And drop the mic.

[orangecrush]

17. Yup.

[Earthshine2]

21. Exactly. He should say that, and then in time, add as many judges as it takes to unpack that court.

[MichMan]

22. Once congress expands, does the president need to sign into law ?

If so, I don't see how saying it is up to congress is going to answer the questions from the press.

[Polybius]

26. Yes, both the House and Senate have to pass it

Then it's up to the President to sign it or veto it.

[Hotler]

27. I don't think he should say anything. Keep any strategy hidden until after the election.

One of the problems I see with our elected leaders is they announce plans and strategy which gives the repugs time to plan a defense. You don't when wars that way. I say blindside them every chance we get.

[bigtree]

28. :yawn:

...