Posted on 03/18/2019 1:16:07 PM PDT by caww
Yep.
5.56mm
Correct. There is nothing in ArtIII that mandates Court size. But Morrissey makes for an interesting scenario.
The president can’t do that — not Trump nor any of the bozoids running against him. The number of justices is set by law. congress would have to change it.
But it could be fun. Who do you think the six might be?
The House would have to approve, and neither body will realistically do so. But court packing is legal.
When FDR tried to pack the court, he met a phalanx of opposition from conservative Democrats. There are no longer any conservative Democrats in Congress.
Dude, the rats control the house.
It is, shall we say, unlikely that this Congress will authorize additional seats...
“Make those who support doing it in two years go on record denouncing it now. “
You mean the ones that are on record supporting a wall?
2. There haven’t always been nine justices on the court.
The U.S. Constitution established the Supreme Court but left it to Congress
to decide how many justices should make up the court. The Judiciary Act of
1789 set the number at six: a chief justice and five associate justices.
In 1807, Congress increased the number of justices to seven; in 1837, the
number was bumped up to nine; and in 1863, it rose to 10. In 1866, Congress
passed the Judicial Circuits Act, which shrank the number of justices back
down to seven and prevented President Andrew Johnson from appointing
anyone new to the court. Three years later, in 1869, Congress raised the
number of justices to nine, where it has stood ever since. In 1937, in an
effort to create a court more friendly to his New Deal programs, President
Franklin Roosevelt attempted to convince Congress to pass legislation
that would allow a new justice to be added to the court—for a total of
up to 15 members—for every justice over 70 who opted not to retire.
Congress didn’t go for FDR’s plan.
https://www.history.com/news/7-things-you-might-not-know-about-the-u-s-supreme-court
I agree.
If they are going to campaign on it, then take it away from them as a campaign issue by talking about doing it now.
Make them explain why it's a good idea for the country if they do it, but not so good if Trump does it.
-PJ
IFAIK the senate can change its rules to eliminate the 60 votes required. After that, there would be no limit on the number of justices in scotus in new bills passed by a simple majority.
If Biden won in 2020 and the senate flipped (dems + rinos), I doubt he would veto such bills. With a dem VP, all he would need would be a 50-50 tie vote with his VP providing the tie breaker. Not likely, but strange things happen.
No, absolutely not. The “conservative” ranks are so corrupted with traitors and those whose idea of conservatism is protecting the uniparty elite that we can’t trust anyone. Better that the list gets vetted better than it was for the likes of Kavanaugh (the privileged elite are going to have a real tough time of it) and John Roberts.
No,cut it down to 5
No,cut it down to 5
No!
I thought it was set in 1940s by Roosevelt and the Dems.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.