September 25, 2020 at 10:45 am #47922
FYI, a friend posted on another forum today suggesting that the Congress has the power not only to change the number of justices but to change the rules of the Court – e.g. Congress could simply change the number of votes needed for a Court decision to 6 votes – so every decision must be 6-3 to pass. (Though this would still require Democrats to get rid of the filibuster as surely Republicans would block any change like this otherwise.) That’s an intriguing idea that would probably protect the ACA and Roe V. Wade with a lot less complication than trying to stack the Court and appoint two new liberals.
Meanwhile, Clarence Thomas might wind up leaving on his own sooner or later for whatever reason, Democrats could replace him if they still have the power, and then maybe the 6-3 rule could be reverted back to 5-4.September 25, 2020 at 11:47 am #47924semoochieParticipant
Maybe, it’s time to get rid of the Senate in its present form. Rather than continuing to represent property owners, perhaps, it too should represent the people at large and have just as many members as the House, still elected every six years!September 25, 2020 at 11:50 am #47925
Get rid of the Senate, get rid of the Electoral College – nice ideas but pipe dreams in the real world. Both would require a Constitutional Amendment. Not going to happen anytime soon.October 26, 2020 at 8:19 pm #48504
So, as expected here we are. 5 weeks after RBG dies this handmaid has been slammed through a fucking week before an election on a 100% partisan vote.
5 sitting SCOTUS have been placed by a President that lost the popular vote.
The SCOTUS is now a fully owned body of the GOP.October 26, 2020 at 8:48 pm #48505BroadwayParticipant
It’s more of a 5-4 as Roberts has turned out to be turncoat.October 26, 2020 at 9:07 pm #48506bookemdonoParticipant
Isn’t it 3, not 5?October 26, 2020 at 9:24 pm #48507paulwalkerParticipant
I’m not certain the new justice will vote against Obamacare. There could be a November surprise here.October 26, 2020 at 9:32 pm #48508
Wrong.October 26, 2020 at 9:33 pm #48509
2 Bush and 3 Trump. Both did not win the popular vote.October 27, 2020 at 12:47 am #48512Andy BrownParticipant
Everything (and I do mean everything) hinges on two things: control of the Senate, assuming the Democrats hold their House majority, and the size of Biden’s electoral victory.October 27, 2020 at 8:35 am #48518bookemdonoParticipant
Oh right. The W years seem so long ago that I wasn’t thinking about his contribution to the supreme court. Contributions that seem relatively mild in comparison to the latest confirmations.October 27, 2020 at 10:14 am #48519BobParticipant
We can thank Harry Reid in part for the unraveling.October 27, 2020 at 10:16 am #48520
George W. Bush won the popular vote handily in 2004 (though his electoral college victory over Kerry was more narrow than it seems – Ohio was pretty close and had it gone Kerry, Kerry would have won the election).
So no, Bush didn’t appoint anyone to the Supreme Court until he had won the popular vote.October 27, 2020 at 10:22 am #48521
Broadway: “It’s more of a 5-4 as Roberts has turned out to be turncoat.”
Not really. Roberts is still a conservative who has voted with the other Republicans on the Court in a number of important cases like Citizens United and the one overturning half of the Voting Rights Act.
What Roberts has been more concerned about is the institutional integrity of the Court. That is clearly the reason he has flipped some 5-4 cases the other way. He knew that overturning big laws like Obamacare would make the Court look like simply another political body. (And in the first Obamacare case, he did allow states to opt out of Medicaid expansion, which was a huge blow to the law.) But now that there are five conservative ideologues on the Court, he won’t get to assert that kind of influence anymore.October 28, 2020 at 8:30 am #48540radiogeekParticipant
Re elections, chaos, power … this is a very interesting artice
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.