General Discussion

diva77

(7,880 posts)

20. +1

Reply to calimary (Reply #12)

Tue Aug 27, 2019, 02:31 PM

Aug 2019

yes

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

71 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Five Democratic senators throw a legal bombshell at the Supreme Court with unusual brief in gun case [View all] Soph0571 Aug 2019 OP

Yeah, go after the judges jberryhill Aug 2019 #1

Does seem like a particularly boneheaded move FBaggins Aug 2019 #17

You're missing the point. Haggis for Breakfast Aug 2019 #45

Apparently so FBaggins Aug 2019 #54

This. This was an unnecessary and stupid thing to do. DetroitLegalBeagle Aug 2019 #59

"Beware, I bear more grudges than lonely high court judges." - - Morrissey LuvNewcastle Aug 2019 #64

what do you suggest doing about corrupt judges? diva77 Aug 2019 #28

worked for FDR Hermit-The-Prog Aug 2019 #31

The FDR administration did not call judges corrupt in filings before the same court, no jberryhill Aug 2019 #34

No he called them old fashion, implied they were senile Farmer-Rick Aug 2019 #41

FDR didn't have to be subtle FBaggins Aug 2019 #53

Well around 1937, when the RepubliCON Great Depression rebounded, Farmer-Rick Aug 2019 #55

Identify the case brief in which that happened jberryhill Aug 2019 #56

I am not implying a similar case Farmer-Rick Aug 2019 #57

Best news of the day!!! katmondoo Aug 2019 #2

"Amicus" seems like the wrong word here (nt) Recursion Aug 2019 #3

It's an Animus Brief CaptainTruth Aug 2019 #44

damn, beat me to it GMTA Celerity Aug 2019 #51

The Senators who filed the brief are... hedda_foil Aug 2019 #4

Thanks elleng Aug 2019 #27

I don't see Whitehouse doing this sort of thing without something going on behind the scenes. pecosbob Aug 2019 #5

Whitehouse is no intellectual giant hack89 Aug 2019 #7

I'm surprised to hear that - I thought his speech on the "Roberts' Five" was brilliant at the diva77 Aug 2019 #19

He is an astute politician hack89 Aug 2019 #22

and this one cannot even handle draughts Celerity Aug 2019 #52

LOL RhodeIslandOne Aug 2019 #36

Read Whitehouse's book, "Captured"(2017) and I think you'd change your mind. I think it's brilliant. ancianita Aug 2019 #38

Melanie Wachtell Stinnett is the brains of that partnership. hack89 Aug 2019 #40

The brains? How? She's cowritten for people other than politicians. Is she the brains of them, too? ancianita Aug 2019 #43

There is a reason people hire "cowriters" hack89 Aug 2019 #49

Not at all. They already know more than the writers. The writers are there to make their knowledge ancianita Aug 2019 #71

Suspect there is a lot going on, strategically. The Speaker must be aware, etc. empedocles Aug 2019 #33

+1 Indeed. ancianita Aug 2019 #37

Should be useful in raising some campaign cash hack89 Aug 2019 #6

What? paleotn Aug 2019 #11

It is foolish to think this will influence the court hack89 Aug 2019 #21

Not yet, and this isn't meant to influence the court. paleotn Aug 2019 #24

"threaten them with irrelevance" hack89 Aug 2019 #26

Actually there is it would involve increasing the number of chief justices enough that cstanleytech Aug 2019 #46

And you get that through the Senate how? Nt hack89 Aug 2019 #50

Not this Senate. paleotn Aug 2019 #58

I didnt say it could or would happen right now rather I am pointing out the potential way it could cstanleytech Aug 2019 #67

You're assuming the political makeup is static paleotn Aug 2019 #60

So the next Republican Senates add another two justices hack89 Aug 2019 #65

And this is all to make the Supreme Court look LESS political? FBaggins Aug 2019 #69

If there is another Republican Senate paleotn Aug 2019 #70

It could also be very productive... LanternWaste Aug 2019 #23

When every legal analysis says it is a waste of time hack89 Aug 2019 #25

I don't understand the strategy here Amishman Aug 2019 #8

The right wingers are not cemented, they're chisled in granite. paleotn Aug 2019 #10

Yep! It's long past time our side said something, calimary Aug 2019 #12

+1 diva77 Aug 2019 #20

Except they are not voting as a bloc, we are seeing splits Amishman Aug 2019 #30

Yet then there was the recent ruling they made rubber stamping gerrymandering. cstanleytech Aug 2019 #47

Setting the stage for Mayor Pete's presidency? n/t RichardRay Aug 2019 #9

The Constitution doesn't say that SCOTUS can only have 9 members... paleotn Aug 2019 #13

It's been tried before Wednesdays Aug 2019 #35

Different times. Different circumstances. paleotn Aug 2019 #63

Recommended. H2O Man Aug 2019 #14

Good for them.. mountain grammy Aug 2019 #15

K&R ffr Aug 2019 #16

Wowser! That's a pretty ballsy move. nt procon Aug 2019 #18

K&R... spanone Aug 2019 #29

We get the Senate and the Presidency. kairos12 Aug 2019 #32

The brief is irrelevant, what's news is the Democrats are fighting! bucolic_frolic Aug 2019 #39

This will backfire hilariously. Loki Liesmith Aug 2019 #42

Our senators make the staggering claim that politics influences SCOTUS appointments. aikoaiko Aug 2019 #48

It was more of a warning to the justices not to use their position cstanleytech Aug 2019 #68

Expect.... ewagner Aug 2019 #61

28 USC 1 Mike Niendorff Aug 2019 #62

Truth to power. world wide wally Aug 2019 #66