Posted on 10/09/2018 10:10:21 AM PDT by nikos1121
Brett Kavanaugh has been confirmed, and he will serve as a justice on the supreme court for the rest of his life. This event assures rightwing dominance of the court for a generation – or so we are told. After all, at 53, he is not even the youngest conservative: Justice Neil Gorsuch is 51. The chief justice, who has been there for more than a decade, is only 63. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, by contrast, is 85, and Justice Stephen Breyer is 80. We are in, it seems, for decades of misery for labor unions, voting rights, regulation of businesses and all the rest. Or are we? The logic behind this “lost for a generation” stuff is simple enough. There are nine seats on the supreme court. All of its members serve for life. The five-justice conservative majority is quite young and seems healthy. Given all that, Kavanaugh’s confirmation is the final nail in the coffin, isn’t it? The ray of hope, if there is one, lies in contradiction of the first of those premises. Nothing in the constitution fixes the number of supreme court seats at nine. The size of the court is set by legislation, and has varied over time. We started with six. We’ve gone as high as 10 (when Abraham Lincoln was president, and Congress worried about a reactionary supreme court invalidating his wartime measures). Only recently, Republicans held the court to eight members for a year in the wake of Antonin Scalia’s death. So, then, the next time the left has some political power, why not just expand the size of the supreme court and add another handful of justices? Make Brett Kavanaugh a gifted and energetic member of a 10-to-5 minority. Don’t get mad, in other words: get even.
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
Yup. FDR became America’s only President-for-life but even he couldn’t go that far, try as he might.
Time to call your representatives and senators to get a bill passed limiting the number of SCOTUS Justices to 9.
The UK Guardian is also fond of lecturing us Yanks about our “lax gun laws” and our “Rambo culture”. Google “American gun culture” or “American love affair with guns” and the article and comments are full of condescension & superiority & outright hatred.
“I worked in America for twenty years but I had to leave because of all the crazy gun owners.” is a favorite refrain.
Fine, Brits. Enjoy your Muslims!
This is all such crap. Trump is going to be in office til 2024. Even if the dems control the house such a bill would never get throught the senate. Even if it did Trump could veto it. To override a veto congress needs a two thirds majority and that ain’t going to happen. People talk this $hit and evidently have no idea how our government works. So much for our media, ignoramuses.
I don't remember Hannity telling Kav that he had 24 hours to clear his name, do you? I don't listen to him any more but I doubt he has even mentioned Judge Moore during this kerfuffle. I occasionally record him and fast forward to the guest session, I don't want to hear his monologue twice, tells me what is in the monologue then does the monologue.
Have Trump try to pack the court. In his last year, he can nominate everyone he has put on a federal court. Linsey Graham can lead the opposition of bipartisan Congress people to quickly create a constitutional amendment to limit the court to nine. States will ratify it quickly, and then Trump can back down. We’ll all be home in time for dinner.
Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937
In fact, the 22nd Amendment was ratified partly so that one president couldn’t establish an activist justice majority, the horse already escaped from the barn by the time 22A was ratified.
Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution
The bottom line is that the federal Constitution is nowhere near as ambiguous as activist justices who subvert the will of the state supermajority as enumerated in the Constitution want everybody to believe.
In fact, a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that the Constitution was written so that us deplorables could read it.
"The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary, as distinguished from technical, meaning; where the intention is clear, there is no room for construction and no excuse for interpolation or addition [emphasis added].” —United States v. Sprague, 1931.
In other words, split Supreme Court decisions should be a rare thing imo, such decisions indicating that it is time to either impeach activist justices or amend the Constitution.
Thomas Jefferson had put it this way.
"In every event, I would rather construe so narrowly as to oblige the nation to amend, and thus declare what powers they would agree to yield, than too broadly, and indeed, so broadly as to enable the executive and the Senate to do things which the Constitution forbids." --Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793.
Given all that, Kavanaugh’s confirmation is the final nail in the coffin, isn’t it?
Nope. The next one will be and the one we get after will close case.
Your other claptrap fantasy is stupid...
To the author
I think from what I have read that two are necessary.
The first will be a replacement for one of the leftists. RBG
These people are beyond a doubt the stupidest people on the face of he earth. Every progressive clown since FDR has had this “pack the court” fantasy and NO ONE supports it.
Did you read Meghan McCain commentary, just posted?
I can’t believe how stupid these people are.
Trump is the only adult in the room. He’s playing with children...
1. Democrats
2. RINOs (the ones left
3. Never Trumpers (the ones left)
4. OUr adversairies
5. Allies
6. press
7. etc etc
“We have been there, done that...
“Total flop.”
Only because reasonable democrats objected to and delayed the proposal. Its not 1937 anymore and elected RATS are no longer moderate or reasonable. There is no reason a court packing scheme would fail today with a Rat President and a RAT controlled house and Senate. There isnt even a filibuster anymore for the minority to object. I would not dismiss this as unrealistic.
“These people are nuts”
Whether slightly or entirely, to one degree or another leftists are under the sway of Satan. Whether it’s insanity, evil, or some combination, they must be stopped.
“Nor does he answer the objection that if the Dems do it, the Republicans will do it as well”
That’s because their goal is to remain in power permanently.
Typical leftist. Born ignorant; die ignorant. The rest of us learn a little something between our first cry and our last breath.
Ruthie I think is not long lived on the SCOTUS now that it’s “mostly” 5-4. And we know how libs don’t like being in the minority when it comes to power. Oh she could be long lived on the SCOTUS still but I think her TDS will not allow it! Winning!
They could do your #1, but
your #2 would require a constitutional amendment.
“The Judiciary Act of 1869 (16 Stat. 44), also called the Circuit Judges Act of 1869, is a United States statute that stipulated that the makeup of the United States Supreme Court would consist of the Chief Justice and eight associate justices, any six of whom would constitute a quorum.”
I wouldn't put it past the dems to try this again against the feckless GOP, but most likely they would go "the Scalia route" , better known as "The Pelican Brief" - assassinate those members that block your ambitions and replace them with libs, a la Merrick Garland.
As much as I dislike Mitchie McConnell, I will say he has done an excellent job managing the Court by blocking Garland and ramming through Kavanaugh.
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.