Biden Forming a Commision to Change the Supreme Court

tehmackdaddy

post tenebras lux
Joined
Nov 7, 2006
Messages
19,302
Reaction score
2,265
Points
113
Location
IN the world, but not OF the world
Let's stop beating around the bush.

Democrats lost control of the Supreme Court and want that control back.

That is all this is, no matter the consequences, and they feel with their policy positions that they can control the Court for a very long time.

This is about power, only and absolutely.
 

aloyouis

at least generally aware
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
8,670
Reaction score
2,763
Points
113
Location
Michigan
Let's stop beating around the bush.

Democrats lost control of the Supreme Court and want that control back.

That is all this is, no matter the consequences, and they feel with their policy positions that they can control the Court for a very long time.

This is about power, only and absolutely.
Precisely.
 

rivshark86

Active member
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
994
Reaction score
184
Points
43
It’s not like the Supreme Court is that conservative anyway. At best you could call them slightly right of moderate.

Sigh......... if liberals were running things there you can absolutely believe they’d be using the power of the court in its full strength to push their agenda. They would not be worried about the blowback. Conservatives on the other hand are actually worried about protecting the illusion of the court being non partisan.
Why can’t we get more fighters appointed? Even Trumps appointees have disappointed. Thank God for Thomas and Alito. And Bush had to be forced into Alito.
On a side note, thank God the Bushes are out of Republican politics. That family set the party back 30 years. John Roberts George?! Really?!?!?
 
Last edited:

AkPatsFan

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
7,762
Reaction score
1,873
Points
113
Location
Eagle River, Ak
Democrats plan to pass a bill to add 4 justices to the court.
Joe Biden wouldn't answer the question presented to him in one of the debates about this very subject because he knew that if he won, that's exactly what they were going to do. tehmackdaddy hit the nail on he head with his post.
 

Coltsfan2theend

Custom Titles, we don't need no custom titles
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
9,857
Reaction score
2,416
Points
113
They only want this because trump was able to sway the court more conservative. Who is to say if democrats get their way (not a sure thing in either house of Congress) that if Republicans get sole power of houses of Congress and White House they don’t add five more and make it more conservative again. Then Vice versa. It should be maxed at an even number and it shouldn’t be many more then there is now. Also it should be a good even split between conservative and liberal judges to not sway the court one way in political feelings. I know justices are supposed to be neither side but t that was shown with Ginsburg that they are. She should’ve retired years earlier but wouldn’t because she didn’t want trump to nominate someone. In the end he did anyway. Frankly they should be limited to 20 years on the bench.
 

BostonTim

IIWII
Joined
Apr 9, 2005
Messages
34,860
Reaction score
6,029
Points
113
Age
73
Let's stop beating around the bush.

Democrats lost control of the Supreme Court and want that control back.

That is all this is, no matter the consequences, and they feel with their policy positions that they can control the Court for a very long time.

This is about power, only and absolutely.
Couldn't have said it better even if I could. :rofl::rofl::rofl:
 

king of kings

All Hail
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
25,972
Reaction score
2,431
Points
113
Age
40
Location
Ohio
Let's stop beating around the bush.

Democrats lost control of the Supreme Court and want that control back.

That is all this is, no matter the consequences, and they feel with their policy positions that they can control the Court for a very long time.

This is about power, only and absolutely.
Your correct Everything in poltics is about power. Neither party passes anything unless its benefits them.
 

deec77

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 8, 2008
Messages
17,548
Reaction score
8,894
Points
113
The Speaker also said she wants to wait until the commission has finished......before she entertains the idea

~Dee~
 

PatsFan09

Done. And. Done.
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
20,974
Reaction score
2,241
Points
113
Location
Circumlocuting around New England...
67c226de39dca67dcb4b726a09a49109.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

HSanders

omitted out of respect to Mrs.Jastremski
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
27,347
Reaction score
6,286
Points
113
Location
on Pats Planet
Posts like that ⬆️
really make me miss the 🤣
 
Last edited:
OP
johnlocke

johnlocke

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
13,250
Reaction score
4,849
Points
113
Age
48
Location
Salisbury, NH

Ocasio-Cortez weighed in on the latest proposal from several prominent Democrats in Congress to “pack” the Supreme Court by adding four new Democrat-selected justices to the bench to skew its ideological balance in their party’s favor. This proposal is disastrous and dangerous in and of itself. Yet, the congresswoman not only endorsed the plan to turn the Supreme Court into a rubber stamp but essentially suggested that she doesn’t believe the high court should act as a check on Congress at all.

According to Fox News, Ocasio-Cortez questioned why the justices "can overturn laws that hundreds and thousands of legislators, advocates, and policymakers drew consensus on."

“How much does the current structure benefit us?" she asked. “I don't think it does."

With these remarks, the congresswoman misunderstands or rejects the very role the Supreme Court plays in safeguarding our constitutional liberties. She decries the fact that the judiciary can overrule elected policymakers, but that’s exactly the point.
 
Top