Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I'm losing hope [View all]Hortensis
(58,785 posts)23. Here's another fact to consider: Our constitution leaves the number of SCOTUS positions open.
Congress legislates the number of seats. At first they decided 6, then 5, then 6, then 7, then 9, then 10, then 7, then 9 again.
It's been 9 since the 1800s now, embedded in tradition, but an ultraconservative Koch-packed court could be blasted open at any time by a congress that decided we needed 11, or 15.
We've actually been here before. FDR had to deal with a supreme court which had been strongly conservative for 2 or 3 generations.
At one point over more than a year all the most important parts of his New Deal were struck down as unconstitutional. So he hatched a plan for him, the president, to appoint more justices, which caused a political firestorm. He eventually lost but not before SCOTUS self protectively started upholding some parts of the New Deal, which we have today, and eventually FDR got to appoint a replacement for someone who'd died, changing the balance.
Just something to keep in mind. Every action always causes reactions, every change causes new changes. And there is a fix if it gets too bad.
It's been 9 since the 1800s now, embedded in tradition, but an ultraconservative Koch-packed court could be blasted open at any time by a congress that decided we needed 11, or 15.
We've actually been here before. FDR had to deal with a supreme court which had been strongly conservative for 2 or 3 generations.
At one point over more than a year all the most important parts of his New Deal were struck down as unconstitutional. So he hatched a plan for him, the president, to appoint more justices, which caused a political firestorm. He eventually lost but not before SCOTUS self protectively started upholding some parts of the New Deal, which we have today, and eventually FDR got to appoint a replacement for someone who'd died, changing the balance.
Just something to keep in mind. Every action always causes reactions, every change causes new changes. And there is a fix if it gets too bad.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
60 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The criminal violation of the constitution by McConnell with Garland was the end of
Eliot Rosewater
Sep 2017
#1
Here's another fact to consider: Our constitution leaves the number of SCOTUS positions open.
Hortensis
Sep 2017
#23
The number of justices is defined by the Circuit Justices Act, and would need to be changed.
Amishman
Oct 2017
#59
We're hijacked by people who don't believe in use of government but for themselves (VIDEO)
CrispyQ
Sep 2017
#11
Well now we know that they knew that the Russians were going to Jack are voting systems
elehhhhna
Oct 2017
#52
Had we not lost the Senate, it would not have happened so there are things we can do...if some here
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#31
We lost it and the house because Obama wasnt perfect from the get go so they punished him
Eliot Rosewater
Sep 2017
#33
That is the crux of the problem...we have some who are never happy...and the strange thing is...one
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#44
Even if they couldn't stop GOP obstruction, they should have raised holy hell over Merrick Garland
Chasstev365
Sep 2017
#2
I agree. I also think this was a situation in which the assumption that HRC would win
enough
Sep 2017
#7
That is total crap..many of us warned about Trump and that those who planned a protest vote
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#29
For gods sake, I have a slightly different view from yours. Of course there were many people
enough
Oct 2017
#47
Congress never went into recess during the Obama administration. And the courts ruled against his
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#28
Sorry it is that sort of an attitude...that causes us to lose elections...not supporting Obama is
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#43
Quit blaming the Democrats..voters whining about emails like that troll Sarandon helped put Trump in
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#27
Nothing Obama said would have made any difference, and he was out there...so
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#30
Stop blaming Obama...they were never going to allow him a pick...don't you think possibly Republican
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#42
Not true...honestly the Obama hate demonstrated on this sight is ridiculous.
Demsrule86
Oct 2017
#55
All this was foreseeable, but people like Susan sarandon did not give a f*ck!
Madam45for2923
Sep 2017
#9
Nope...not letting folks like Susan Sarandon off the hook...and those who whined about single payer
Demsrule86
Oct 2017
#56
Yes...this is why it was so important to elect Hillary...you know to the victors go the spoils.
Demsrule86
Sep 2017
#25
We can only continue to keep an eye on him and hope to get video of him
Baitball Blogger
Sep 2017
#26