Latest Breaking News

ColinC

(11,098 posts)

16. Exactly. Congress has the full authority in this regard...

Reply to cstanleytech (Reply #14)

Thu Apr 15, 2021, 03:38 AM

Apr 2021

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

47 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Democrats to introduce bill to expand Supreme Court from 9 to 13 justices [View all] Polybius Apr 2021 OP

Democrats go big & go bold to save our Democracy. Budi Apr 2021 #1

how can we help? nt Grasswire2 Apr 2021 #2

I don't see why they're even attempting this... regnaD kciN Apr 2021 #3

I agree. This is a bad move before the commission has even made recommendations. Lonestarblue Apr 2021 #28

Such moves might be more appropriate and successful after we hopefully prevail in the mid terms. Ligyron Apr 2021 #29

Naysaying will kill us. lagomorph777 Apr 2021 #34

That commission has been announced, but notinkansas Apr 2021 #35

Agree RobinA Apr 2021 #39

This is a positive step ... in the right direction given the circumstance ... KPN Apr 2021 #4

They won't even get 50 qazplm135 Apr 2021 #5

Yeah, Dems can only lose 3 votes, and it won't pass. Calista241 Apr 2021 #6

It's just to appease the base advocating for it madville Apr 2021 #20

Good. We have to start trying. nt SunSeeker Apr 2021 #7

This sounds like laying down a marker. Mawspam2 Apr 2021 #8

Not going to happen. nt Raine Apr 2021 #9

This is from last Friday.... BigmanPigman Apr 2021 #10

According to McConnell you only need 51 votes when it comes to SCOTUS. cstanleytech Apr 2021 #11

This is the thing. Could his rules passed in 2017 apply to this law? ColinC Apr 2021 #13

The rules in question though are not rules the Constitution requires are they? If not then cstanleytech Apr 2021 #14

Exactly. Congress has the full authority in this regard... ColinC Apr 2021 #16

"Joe Biden has said he is 'not a fan' of packing the court" PSPS Apr 2021 #12

well -- except for the fact that the term stopdiggin Apr 2021 #17

I don't really see any purpose to this stopdiggin Apr 2021 #15

Well... Mike Nelson Apr 2021 #18

Majority support does nothing Polybius Apr 2021 #40

This would be a gamble that Republicans will never regain control madville Apr 2021 #19

Dont know why this isnt obvious. But it would have to be 101; tiebreaker. oldsoftie Apr 2021 #21

Not necessarily madville Apr 2021 #25

OK. lagomorph777 Apr 2021 #36

Kick dalton99a Apr 2021 #22

I think it needs to be more creative than just expand the court Buckeyeblue Apr 2021 #23

Expansion does not require a Constitutional Amendment. lagomorph777 Apr 2021 #37

I get that. But the problems with the court run deeper than actual members Buckeyeblue Apr 2021 #38

Expand it to be huge - I don't care. lagomorph777 Apr 2021 #43

The snuffing of the Garland nomination is a bigger issue in my view bucolic_frolic Apr 2021 #24

This. There is too much weasel room in the rules for such a weasel. "Because I say so" can't suffice JudyM Apr 2021 #33

dems are not playing around Roc2020 Apr 2021 #26

Will this be not passed before or after reparations? brooklynite Apr 2021 #27

I guess its just fine and dandy that the "federalist society" can pack courts and other legislative turbinetree Apr 2021 #30

Pack the Federal Circuit Courts SmartVoter22 Apr 2021 #31

YYYEEESSSSS! Time to kill the Filibuster so we can get this done! lagomorph777 Apr 2021 #32

It still wouldn't be done Polybius Apr 2021 #41

We haven't tightened the screws on Manchin yet. lagomorph777 Apr 2021 #44

Disgusting, last thing this country needs is 4 more life time appointments to the highest court Devil Child Apr 2021 #42

Hahahaha! lagomorph777 Apr 2021 #45

Abolish lifetime terms n/t Devil Child Apr 2021 #46

Dramatically more difficult than expanding the court. lagomorph777 Apr 2021 #47