Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Supreme Court Threatened
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10 next>>
Aug 14, 2019 16:27:53   #
Wrangler (a regular here)
 
The dems threatened the Supreme Court by demanding it “heal itself or face restructuring.”

My question is “Does heal itself mean walk like a dog on a leash?”

| Reply
Aug 14, 2019 16:38:33   #
Rose42 (a regular here)
 
Wrangler wrote:
The dems threatened the Supreme Court by demanding it “heal itself or face restructuring.”

My question is “Does heal itself mean walk like a dog on a leash?”


It appears thats what the democrats mean.

| Reply
Aug 14, 2019 17:57:24   #
Frank T (a regular here)
 
How about they stop voting on party lines?
Yes. Both sides.

| Reply
Aug 14, 2019 18:22:45   #
Angmo (a regular here)
 
Frank T wrote:
How about they stop voting on party lines?
Yes. Both sides.


5 don’t. The other 4... agree.

| Reply
Aug 14, 2019 18:52:06   #
Rose42 (a regular here)
 
Frank T wrote:
How about they stop voting on party lines?
Yes. Both sides.


Thats what they’ve always tended to do. Would be nice if they didn’t

| Reply
Aug 14, 2019 20:33:58   #
mjmoore17 (a regular here)
 
Wrangler wrote:
The dems threatened the Supreme Court by demanding it “heal itself or face restructuring.”

My question is “Does heal itself mean walk like a dog on a leash?”


It means that increasing size of Supreme Court will accurately reflect the wishes of the American public. They brought it on themselves.

| Reply
Aug 14, 2019 21:05:16   #
letmedance (a regular here)
 
mjmoore17 wrote:
It means that increasing size of Supreme Court will accurately reflect the wishes of the American public. They brought it on themselves.


Do you have a source for your claim?

| Reply
Aug 14, 2019 22:36:36   #
btbg (a regular here)
 
mjmoore17 wrote:
It means that increasing size of Supreme Court will accurately reflect the wishes of the American public. They brought it on themselves.


It doesn't mean that. It means that whatever side holds the presidency when the court is enlarged will control the courts for at least a generation. Even Ginsberg is against it because she recognizes that it could backfire for liberals.

| Reply
Aug 14, 2019 22:37:18   #
btbg (a regular here)
 
Frank T wrote:
How about they stop voting on party lines?
Yes. Both sides.


If you look, the four liberals always vote together. Three of the five "conservatives do not" so who is voting on party lines. Only the left.

| Reply
Aug 14, 2019 23:21:53   #
thom w (a regular here)
 
Rose42 wrote:
Thats what they’ve always tended to do. Would be nice if they didn’t


Rose, you think you are so well informed. Traditionally one could not accurately predict what a new justice would do. Earl warren was a Republican, appointed by a republican president. He is but one example.

| Reply
Aug 14, 2019 23:23:58   #
pendennis (a regular here)
 
Hmmmmm.

Article III, Section 1., only states that Congress will have control over "inferior courts", not the United States Supreme Court.

In 1937, FDR attempted to "pack" the Supreme Court with a scheme that was shot down by Congress. This will likely suffer the same outcome. No matter what the Senate wants, it's the President who nominates judges and justices to the U.S. inferior courts' benches. Should a President not want to nominate a judge or justice to the courts or Supreme Court, there's absolutely nothing they can do.

While Section 2 does provide for "...under such regulations as the Congress shall make." It implies that Congress shall have the power to strip the U.S. Supreme Court of its appellate jurisdiction. However, this clause has been rendered meaningless since the U.S. Supreme Court established its primacy in "Marbury v. Madison".

Me thinks Congress is whistling past the graveyard on this one.

| Reply
Aug 14, 2019 23:26:39   #
mjmoore17 (a regular here)
 
pendennis wrote:
Hmmmmm.

Article III, Section 1., only states that Congress will have control over "inferior courts", not the United States Supreme Court.

In 1937, FDR attempted to "pack" the Supreme Court with a scheme that was shot down by Congress. This will likely suffer the same outcome. No matter what the Senate wants, it's the President who nominates judges and justices to the U.S. inferior courts' benches. Should a President not want to nominate a judge or justice to the courts or Supreme Court, there's absolutely nothing they can do.

While Section 2 does provide for "...under such regulations as the Congress shall make." It implies that Congress shall have the power to strip the U.S. Supreme Court of its appellate jurisdiction. However, this clause has been rendered meaningless since the U.S. Supreme Court established its primacy in "Marbury v. Madison".

Me thinks Congress is whistling past the graveyard on this one.
Hmmmmm. br br Article III, Section 1., only state... (show quote)


Except for all the times it has been successfully done. With a democratic president, there will be no problem in assigning new justices.

| Reply
Aug 15, 2019 00:14:13   #
Wrangler (a regular here)
 
mjmoore17 wrote:
It means that increasing size of Supreme Court will accurately reflect the wishes of the American public. They brought it on themselves.

| Reply
Aug 15, 2019 00:21:51   #
BigBear (a regular here)
 
Wrangler wrote:
The dems threatened the Supreme Court by demanding it “heal itself or face restructuring.”

My question is “Does heal itself mean walk like a dog on a leash?”


I am sure that is what they want. Justices who ignore the law and make decisions based on what they want the outcome to be are no longer in good standing and should be removed.

| Reply
Aug 15, 2019 00:37:16   #
mjmoore17 (a regular here)
 
BigBear wrote:
I am sure that is what they want. Justices who ignore the law and make decisions based on what they want the outcome to be are no longer in good standing and should be removed.


Removing will be in order but maybe not quite who you would like.

| Reply
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2019 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.