General Discussion

onenote

(45,963 posts)

98. How? The republicans would have voted lockstep against Garland

Reply to Buzz cook (Reply #97)

Wed Jun 27, 2018, 09:56 PM

Jun 2018

if forced to take a vote. They could argue that they weren't given enough time to vet the nominee.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

98 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What would it take to change Supreme Court tenure to 10 years? [View all] Equinox Moon Jun 2018 OP

A Constitutional Amendment edhopper Jun 2018 #1

Article III judges (including the Supreme Court Justices) rsdsharp Jun 2018 #2

Life time appointments are just wrong. Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #4

rationale is that it frees judges from any job-based commitment to those who appoint them 0rganism Jun 2018 #10

That would be dangerous territory. bearsfootball516 Jun 2018 #3

Well, we don't want that either. Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #5

Now, it is not dangerous territory..It depends on who is appointed, and when, and what is the topic Stuart G Jun 2018 #46

Not only that, but we all just witnessed Republican refusing a SCOTUS nomoniee icymist Jun 2018 #77

I read somewhere that Congress could add more seats to the court YessirAtsaFact Jun 2018 #6

Yes! I remember that now. Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #9

Yes, they can NewJeffCT Jun 2018 #14

Sounds to me like it is time for a change with the # of SCJ's Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #18

FDR didn't really want that to happen; it was a bold move on his part. Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2018 #91

The Constitution is silent on the number of SC justices. 9 is statutory. Therefore, it's changeable. Shrike47 Jun 2018 #16

and, he tried to enlarge it when Democrats controlled both Houses, I believe NewJeffCT Jun 2018 #21

With McTurtle refusing to even consider Obama's nominees YessirAtsaFact Jun 2018 #25

Yes. Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #26

Only 1 SCOTUS justice has been impeached in the history of the country NewJeffCT Jun 2018 #27

life time back then was about 50 yrs old.... samnsara Jun 2018 #7

Good point Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #19

Not for the founding fathers onenote Jun 2018 #34

"Average lifetime" was short due to infant and child mortality struggle4progress Jun 2018 #63

What FDR tried to do Freddie Jun 2018 #8

We need FEARCE Dem leadership to take actions like this, increasing the # on the court Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #12

Yes... FarPoint Jun 2018 #15

One will have to enter.... FarPoint Jun 2018 #11

The irony is that many of us feel like we ARE in a parallel universe now. Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #20

This won't happen genxlib Jun 2018 #13

All really good points, thanks for the discussion Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #17

so what could former judges do? onenote Jun 2018 #66

Retire genxlib Jun 2018 #80

Constitutional amendment...so no chance but judges can be impeached beachbum bob Jun 2018 #22

And, Gorsuch is illegitimate and I would think that would qualify for impeachment Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #28

He was voted on, so it's not.. beachbum bob Jun 2018 #41

He has not committed a high crime or misdemeamor EffieBlack Jun 2018 #67

Not sure about 10 years but definitely a Phoenix61 Jun 2018 #23

I think some state supreme court's have it set for 70 years old Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #24

If that limitation was made law today onenote Jun 2018 #69

If enacted retroactively, absolutely Phoenix61 Jun 2018 #73

Would it matter with the CURRENT USSC abstaining from ruling against gerrymandering? no_hypocrisy Jun 2018 #29

Everyone in gov't should be term limited to 10 years quartz007 Jun 2018 #30

Agreed! Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #33

That produces government-by-lobbyist struggle4progress Jun 2018 #37

Just the OPPOSITE!!!! quartz007 Jun 2018 #42

No. Where there is no institutional memory, the lobbyists step into the vacuum struggle4progress Jun 2018 #57

Correct jberryhill Jun 2018 #58

Exactly! EffieBlack Jun 2018 #68

New laws could be made to restrain or kick out lobbyists Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #70

Would never work EffieBlack Jun 2018 #74

That would work out very poorly mythology Jun 2018 #39

Common...all the power resides with seniority quartz007 Jun 2018 #43

The inexperienced legislators will be heavily dependent on lobbyists EffieBlack Jun 2018 #71

Term limits would give us fewer Teddys and more Teds EffieBlack Jun 2018 #72

No. Terrible idea. PoindexterOglethorpe Jun 2018 #82

The surest way to eliminate corruption in DC is quartz007 Jun 2018 #86

You are also ignoring the obvious quartz007 Jun 2018 #87

Running the government in 1789 was vastly simpler PoindexterOglethorpe Jun 2018 #88

We have term limits. It's called "don't vote for them, then" Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2018 #92

It won't happen...constitutional amendment...work to take the senate if we get it...no more judges. Demsrule86 Jun 2018 #31

Yes, right, need a constitutional amendment for term limits quartz007 Jun 2018 #44

We might take the Senate...tough pickup but... Demsrule86 Jun 2018 #48

2018 results will surprise...for the better! quartz007 Jun 2018 #51

I am hopeful too... Demsrule86 Jun 2018 #64

Or we could have done a more aggressive push to get our rightful nominee in.... vi5 Jun 2018 #32

Disagree . People need to stop fkg around with their vote. Fullduplexxx Jun 2018 #35

I support life-time appointments: it insulates the courts from short-term political influence struggle4progress Jun 2018 #36

Voters will have more power because... quartz007 Jun 2018 #45

You propose a regime in which jurisprudence oscillates wildly from year to year, struggle4progress Jun 2018 #49

Why is a 90 year old judge better than a middle age judge? quartz007 Jun 2018 #50

The oldest-ever Supreme Court justice, Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr, retired at 90 in early 1931 struggle4progress Jun 2018 #55

Ruth Bader Ginsburg. PoindexterOglethorpe Jun 2018 #83

How sharp is her mind compared to quartz007 Jun 2018 #85

I don't follow her closely but I get the distinct impression PoindexterOglethorpe Jun 2018 #89

Even if mind is sharp, there is palpable physical deterioration after 75 quartz007 Jun 2018 #96

Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. struggle4progress Jun 2018 #94

Absolutely agree Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2018 #93

Send some justices to Cheney's ranch for a little hunting. lagomorph777 Jun 2018 #38

Expand the court from 9 members to 11. shraby Jun 2018 #40

What we need is a 21 person court SoCalDem Jun 2018 #47

I like it! Equinox Moon Jun 2018 #59

There should never be lifetime appointments for any office or position. democratisphere Jun 2018 #52

You realize that is the exact same argument people use against teacher tenure? MichMan Jun 2018 #53

There should be NO TENURE for anyone, including teachers. democratisphere Jun 2018 #54

You are wrong about teachers...the worst school I ever taught in was in Georgia where there Demsrule86 Jun 2018 #65

Welcome to the corporate world. democratisphere Jun 2018 #75

It was terrible. Teaching there was a form of child abuse. I was ordered to get certain kids out... Demsrule86 Jun 2018 #84

No one should be absolutely safe from removal. But for many professional positions, struggle4progress Jun 2018 #56

Absolutely agree with that! democratisphere Jun 2018 #61

Teacher tenure does not prevent removal of teachers struggle4progress Jun 2018 #62

meteor strike librechik Jun 2018 #60

10 years is too long. 6 years is more than enough. democratisphere Jun 2018 #76

Not for limits. Sometimes long tenure works in our favor, sometimes not. Hoyt Jun 2018 #78

You could make a rule that a nomination has to Buzz cook Jun 2018 #79

That would be a terrible rule onenote Jun 2018 #95

But it would keep Mitch Mconnell Buzz cook Jun 2018 #97

How? The republicans would have voted lockstep against Garland onenote Jun 2018 #98

an amendment to the Constitution. It isn't going to happen still_one Jun 2018 #81

SCOTUS was made lifetime to balance things out. Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2018 #90