Given the opportunity, should the democrats expand the Supreme Court?

[Ajay]

The lying would be amusing if it wasn't so insulting and empirically wrong.

What fucking liberal court is he referring to?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1308412828181815296

Yeah, that pretty nuts. Some have attempted to to quantify the leanings. The methodological seem to be unlikely to catch overall shifts over time and more likely show relative positional relationships for a given time frame.

 

[ivwshane]

Per RINO Joe Scarborough they should.
I am on the fence, let’s see what happens over the next few months and more importantly win the Senate & the Presidency first.

You are on the fence? Why? Do you think republicans will suddenly see the error of their ways? Do you think that as soon as republicans regain power they will look at the democrats unwillingness to buck precedent or tradition and say they will do as the democrats have done?

I’m just curious what your reasoning is because if it’s based on what you hope republicans will do and not what they have been doing for 12+ years, then it looks like you’ve ventured towards the crazy side.

But if that’s not it then please share your reasoning.

 

[fskimospy]

Yeah, that pretty nuts. Some have attempted to to quantify the leanings. The methodological seem to be unlikely to catch overall shifts over time and more likely show relative positional relationships for a given time frame.

What I think people don’t realize is that with the notable exception of the Warren Court SCOTUS has been right wing for most of US history.

Maybe because so many leaders grew up during that time they think it was the norm. It was not.

 

[hal2kilo]

nm

 

[K1052]

Not only have I read a Scalia opinion, I wrote a lengthy case note on Scalia's dissent in Romer v. Evans to satisfy my third year writing requirement. It was less a matter of pretzel logic and more a matter of basing the entire opinion on an invalid (in that case, bigoted) premise, then applying consistent logic to form a pre-determined conclusion. His premise was to employ the old world definition of homosexuality: that being gay was defined by having anal sex, not by having a same-sex preference. That was the problem. His actual logic was fine if you bought the premise.

I haven't seen any bad SCOTUS decision yet which would compare to concluding that Medicare is Constitutional for one age bracket of Americans but not any other age brackets. I'm not even sure how they would attempt to frame such an argument.

That was kind of my point. If they agree to concoct such a premise then anything is possible. The only thing stopping that is our judgement of if enough conservatives on the court would agree to it.

 

[hal2kilo]

What I think people don’t realize is that with the notable exception of the Warren Court SCOTUS has been right wing for most of US history.

Maybe because so many leaders grew up during that time they think it was the norm. It was not.

First awareness of politics in my life. Riding in the Virginia country side, with signs that said Impeach Earl Warren. And thus my political journey began when I ask my parents what that was all about.

 

[woolfe9998]

That was kind of my point. If they agree to concoct such a premise then anything is possible. The only thing stopping that is our judgement of if enough conservatives on the court would agree to it.

One thing I have always been very adept at is constructing and predicting the best possible argument to support the opposing view. Here is the best possible argument I can come up with for why Medicare is Constitutional for a 65 year old but not a 64 year old:

"Medicare for all is socialism and socialism sucks because reasons. It's OK to have it for grandma and grandpa though because it would be mean to say they can't have it."

If anyone has a better argument, let me know.

Keep in mind that ironically the arguments for invalidating the ACA are far more plausible than any argument for invalidating MFA.

 

[K1052]

What I think people don’t realize is that with the notable exception of the Warren Court SCOTUS has been right wing for most of US history.

Maybe because so many leaders grew up during that time they think it was the norm. It was not.

Based on the reactions to some recent decisions it seems conservatives deem a conservative court to be liberal if the justices R presidents installed ever vote against what they consider conservative ideology. They were openly calling Roberts a traitor a few months ago.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

You are on the fence? Why? Do you think republicans will suddenly see the error of their ways? Do you think that as soon as republicans regain power they will look at the democrats unwillingness to buck precedent or tradition and say they will do as the democrats have done?

I’m just curious what your reasoning is because if it’s based on what you hope republicans will do and not what they have been doing for 12+ years, then it looks like you’ve ventured towards the crazy side.

But if that’s not it then please share your reasoning.

Don’t put the cart before the horse. Win the Presidency & Senate first, then we can discuss the Supreme Court.

 

[eelw]

But what damage can a 6-3 SCOTUS do in 2 months? ACA gets overturned. ACA v2 gets passed in February. Are there any abortion cases on the docket? Biggest worry would be mail in voting. But with the advance poll lineups and the record donations to Biden since Friday, it's energized the left to ensure its a landslide win that can't be disputed.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

But what damage can a 6-3 SCOTUS do in 2 months? ACA gets overturned. ACA v2 gets passed in February. Are there any abortion cases on the docket? Biggest worry would be mail in voting. But with the advance poll lineups and the record donations to Biden since Friday, it's energized the left to ensure its a landslide win that can't be disputed.

I’ve come around on this. If Republicans want to repeal ACA and maybe some day replace it, good.
Let’s see how killing the ACA goes during a pandemic, let’s see how excited your constituents are about getting a $50k Covid bill from the hospital.

 

[GunsMadeAmericaFree]

Now that RGB has died, and the liberals have threatened to pack the court, I think Trump has a very real shot of being re-elected. The fight for the supreme court composition is something that motivates conservatives to go to the polls. I really didn't think Trump had a chance until I drove across most of the state of Ohio last weekend. More than 2/3 of the yard signs I saw were pro Trump.

 

[theeedude]

Yup, tough times call for tough measures when necessary. There are tough times ahead, folks.

Don't lose focus on what's really happening in the country beyond the surface of politics. Conservatism is imploding and desperately grasping for straws and hail maries like SCOTUS and vote suppression to save itself. Trickle down has failed convincingly and become a meme, COVID exposed the failure of small government, young people are far more liberal, and social issues have shifted to the left, with overwhelming support for abortion rights and gay marriage. A sanctimonious bible-thumper SCOTUS will only accelerate it. Liberals have finally started leaving the coasts and moving into swing and red states, flipping them blue, a trend that will accelerate with COVID and work from home. And the new ranks of tougher Democrat politicians are being forged by Mitch McConnell's politics with the triangulating and compromising old guard being slowly but surely phased out.

 

[K1052]

Now that RGB has died, and the liberals have threatened to pack the court, I think Trump has a very real shot of being re-elected. The fight for the supreme court composition is something that motivates conservatives to go to the polls. I really didn't think Trump had a chance until I drove across most of the state of Ohio last weekend. More than 2/3 of the yard signs I saw were pro Trump.

More shy trump voters for those pollsters not to count.

 

[theeedude]

Now that RGB has died, and the liberals have threatened to pack the court, I think Trump has a very real shot of being re-elected. The fight for the supreme court composition is something that motivates conservatives to go to the polls. I really didn't think Trump had a chance until I drove across most of the state of Ohio last weekend. More than 2/3 of the yard signs I saw were pro Trump.

If you drive across California, you'll probably see a lot of pro Trump signs along the highways too.

 

[HomerJS]

Now that RGB has died, and the liberals have threatened to pack the court, I think Trump has a very real shot of being re-elected. The fight for the supreme court composition is something that motivates conservatives to go to the polls. I really didn't think Trump had a chance until I drove across most of the state of Ohio last weekend. More than 2/3 of the yard signs I saw were pro Trump.

So are you saying that with all the death, disease, violence, racism, corruption and economic crashing there are people out there who will vote for Trump that didn't in 2016? Really?

 

[dank69]

The standard now is to do whatever you can get away with. If Democrats take the WH, House, and Senate they should just rig the whole system in every way possible to ensure Republicans never get control back, up to and including installing a dictator for life if necessary.

 

[hal2kilo]

Based on the reactions to some recent decisions it seems conservatives deem a conservative court to be liberal if the justices R presidents installed ever vote against what they consider conservative ideology. They were openly calling Roberts a traitor a few months ago.

That's exactly how I feel, especially how it relates to Romney's "principles".

 

[theeedude]

The standard now is to do whatever you can get away with. If Democrats take the WH, House, and Senate they should just rig the whole system in every way possible to ensure Republicans never get control back, up to and including installing a dictator for life if necessary.

No. But everything they can do under the Constitution, they should. Filibuster isn't in the Constitution, neither is the number 9.

 

[Sunburn74]

Now that RGB has died, and the liberals have threatened to pack the court, I think Trump has a very real shot of being re-elected. The fight for the supreme court composition is something that motivates conservatives to go to the polls. I really didn't think Trump had a chance until I drove across most of the state of Ohio last weekend. More than 2/3 of the yard signs I saw were pro Trump.

Perhaps but I think it's unlikely to motivate conservatives. People are far more strongly motivated by what they want or may lose, not so much by what they have. People like the ACA but didn't vote for clinton. When the ACA was threatened they ran GOP out of town in droves. Remember the Town Halls When they were trying to replace the ACA with trumpcare? People will already have the cake they want . If the GOP votes as they are planning, it won't motivate people to the polls. If they said "hey if trump wins we'll vote for the guy he wants" it would be a motivator.

 

[Sunburn74]

That exactly how I feel, especially how it relates to Romney's "principles".

I'm so disappointed by romney. I really thought he was an honest man. Shame on me for thinking a rich man could enter the kingdom of God.

 

[K1052]

No. But everything they can do under the Constitution, they should. Filibuster isn't in the Constitution, neither is the number 9.

Yeah simply making the GOP accountable for their own unpopularity through fully legal and time honored structural reforms would be enough.

 

[K1052]

If the GOP votes as they are planning, it won't motivate people to the polls. If they said "hey if trump wins we'll vote for the guy he wants" it would be a motivator.

Yes, I have not heard any explanation of how a confirmation before the election helps GOP turnout. I'd probably bet the opposite.

 

[theeedude]

I'm so disappointed by romney. I really thought he was an honest man. Shame on me for thinking a rich man could get into heaven.

I am not surprised at all. He's a Republican first.

 

[theeedude]

Yes, I have not heard any explanation of how a confirmation before the election helps GOP turnout. I'd probably bet the opposite.

I expected McConnell to hold it until after the election to motivate the base like 2016, but then pass it in lame duck if Trump or Senate majority lost. Not sure why he is rushing it, especially since it doesn't look like he'll need the McSally vote.