MovieChat Forums > Politics > Democrats admit they'd pack the Supreme ...

Democrats admit they'd pack the Supreme Court if they win by increasing its size, destroying the nation's stability.

posted 4 years ago by krl97a (5619)
26 replies | jump to latest

Democrat leaders are saying things like this: “If [the Senate] holds a vote in 2020, we pack the court in 2021. It’s that simple,” - Rep. Joe Kennedy (D-Mass), and no one in their party is really pushing back. Biden and Harris themselves refuse to say they won't, meaning they support the notion.

https://townhall.com/columnists/scottruesterholz/2020/10/01/biden-will-pack-the-supreme-court-n2577262

The last president to push for packing the court was FDR, and his own party shut that down as too extreme. No party has pushed the notion of court packing since. Until now.

Taking the radical step would render Trump's 3 picks irrelevant. It would also destroy the stability of the republic by rendering every pick irrelevant and the judicial branch itself a malleable tool of whatever party was in power at the moment. In a few decades we might have 150 people on the Supreme Court. It would become an absurd game. Not that the US would be likely to survive in its current form that long.

At best Democrats are guilty of partisan myopia. But the truth is that the left sees this election as their opportunity to finish off America once and for all, so destabilizing the nation is exactly what they want.

[–] chilidoggg (13397) 4 years ago

Hey, remember when I didn't know that Sandra Day O'Connor voted with Kennedy in the Casey decision?

Yesterday I learned that Neil Gorsuch belongs to an Episcopalian church in Boulder, Colorado. And it sounds pretty liberal even for an Episcopalian church in a college town.

Where was the Harriet Meiers Brigade on that one?

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

Individuals won't matter if parties just start adding new spots every time they take power.

[–] chilidoggg (13397) 4 years ago

Y'all got Souter'd AGAIN!

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

Maybe I'm talking to a recording.

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12889) 4 years ago

Luckily, there's too much infighting among them to ever achieve such a ludicrous feat.

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

Sadly, it's almost certain they would pack the court if they take over the White House and Senate. The filibuster would go bye bye too. They made that clear back in 2016 when they assumed they were about to win. As great as Barrett's appointment is, it may not mean much unless the pro America, pro freedom side wins this election.

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12889) 4 years ago

It's like I always said: if there ever was a political party that would turn into a brutal dictatorship over America, it would be the Democraps.

[–] ultravioletx (10222) 4 years ago

At this point, turnabout is fair play. Repubs already got 2 seats in just four years, and they had to manipulate the rules to get one of them. If they go back on their rule to push in a third, repubs deserve the aftermath they receive.

Repubs hold all the cards. They can avoid any SCOTUS packing agenda by simply waiting until after the election. They already have a conservative majority without ACB. But that's not good enough. There's an ulterior motive. They can't protect Trump with their current SCOTUS majority. One more might not be enough to save him either, but at least they have a shot at it.

So if repubs go through with this, they deserve everything they get in 2021, and all the whining from the right will be sweet tears.

[–] TimMC (9143) 4 years ago

Turnabout is fair play????????

What the fuck are you blathering on about?

If a seat is empty on a president's watch it is his JOB to fill it.

FUCK

You

People

are

INSANE.

[–] christomacin (4572) 4 years ago

I'm not a big fan of what is being proposed either. However, how come that same logic didn't apply in Obama's term?

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Because Obama didn't have the votes in the Senate to have his candidate appointed. Obama was free to go ahead with the nomination as is Trump, but Obama knew he wouldn't win, whereas Trump does have the votes in the Senate to appoint his candidate.

[–] christomacin (4572) 4 years ago

Obama was a pussy. He should have rammed it down their throat and forced them to vote on it anyway. Getting confirmed or not confirmed is only part of the equation. Obama's should have stood up for the branch of government he represented . I am furious for Obama for not standing up for his rights. This has opened up a whole can of worms. No matter what happens, the concept of a Congressional veto over the President is now pretty much guaranteed to be normalized no matter which party is in power. I do think Trump should be allowed to make his pick, by the way. Whether I'm happy about it is another matter. I'm just saying this "no Supreme Court nomination in an election year if the other party is in power" is bullshit, and will be abused by the legislature in the future, regardless of party. It's very likely the time period in which a President has to wait will be expanded ever further outward until the President is essentially no longer independent in making Court nominations.

[–] B1cKsurN (15553) 4 years ago

O'Bama's whole presidency was bend over and take it without lube.

[–] christomacin (4572) 4 years ago

Yeah, he was often a weakling.

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

I'm not a big fan of what is being proposed either. However, how come that same logic didn't apply in Obama's term?

It truly was a different situation, with divided government then. Republicans had been elected to the Senate majority in 2014, more recently than Obama's last election. This time one party was elected into governance over the both the Senate and White House, with Republicans expanding their majority in the most recent election in 2018 in addition to having Trump as president. They have a mandate for this.

And, contrary to the idiot communist ultravioletx's claims, no rules were "manipulate(d)".

[–] ultravioletx (10222) 4 years ago

"If a seat is empty on a president's watch it is his JOB to fill it."

Scalia died in February of 2016. As I said above, repugs prevented Obama from filling the seat by manipulating the rules. They blocked Merrick Garland for nine months and appointed Gorsuch.

So according to you repubs are f*cking insane. I didn't go that far. All I said was:

Turnabout
Is
Fair
Play

[–] Daggerboard (581) 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ultravioletx (10222) 4 years ago

TimMC is the one who said it's the president's job to fill the seat and said you're insane to think otherwise.

Expanding the court is in accordance with the law. You don't get to say something opposes the law based on your feelings.

[–] B1cKsurN (15553) 4 years ago

O'Bama was a loser that didn't try...his fault no one elses.

[–] B1cKsurN (15553) 4 years ago

That's the Bloviator Club for ya!

They are insane, racist, pedo sympathizers, and hate freedom.

[–] elcamino (15540) 4 years ago

The democrats will be to busy making a deal on the sell of the US to China to go out and pack the court.And then it won't really matter how many are on it.

[–] chilidoggg (13397) 4 years ago

Is your boy still bragging about how much money we're getting from the higher tariffs from China? That's like bragging about how much money we're getting from cigarette taxes. We want ZERO extra money, we don't want their SHIT.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Let them do it. It'll eventually undermine the legitimacy of the courts and an end to the United States. It already is now, but at least it will be in the open for everyone to see.

[–] ducksoup (3933) 4 years ago

"Taking the radical step would render Trump's 3 picks irrelevant."

Not kidding, you sold me on the idea right there. No more need be said.

[–] krl97a (5619) 4 years ago

It would also make the Supreme Court, the Constitution, and the republic itself irrelevant, launching an unstable deterioration that could only be reversed by starting over with a new Constitutional convention and/or likely letting states go their separate ways to form multiple new nations.

I'd call Democrats short sighted, except the left's goal is to destroy America.

[–] User548 (2068) 4 years ago

As you can see, duck shit doesn't know what the point of segregation of powers or the role of the SC is for. All he cares about is centralized power for the leftists.