Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Biden's commission that studied expanding the Supreme Court beyond its 6-3 conservative majority as well as term limits to issue preliminary report Thursday
Daily Mail ^ | October 14, 2021 | REUTERS

Posted on 10/14/2021 8:15:32 AM PDT by LibertyWoman

President Joe Biden's commission studying potential U.S. Supreme Court changes such as expanding the number of justices or imposing term limits on them will release its preliminary draft report on Thursday, the White House said on Wednesday.

...

Biden signed an executive order in April creating the commission. It held its first meeting the following month.

...

The Supreme Court during its current term is considering major cases in which its conservative majority could restrict abortion rights and widen gun rights, alarming liberals.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last
To: LibertyWoman

Biden’s commission isn’t a report it’s a demand.

It’s a now or never socialism war.


41 posted on 10/14/2021 9:07:10 AM PDT by Vaduz (women and children to be impacIQ of chimpsted the most.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: escapefromboston

There was a specific reason for the “Life Term”. They wouldn’t lean one way or another because they had a promise of an “enviable position” after their term was up.


42 posted on 10/14/2021 9:08:42 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ChronicMA

Article III of the Constitution does not mention judicial term limits. So judges serve for life. Congress could try to set term limits for new federal judges, but that power is not expressly given to them in Article III.

I suppose such an attempt would go to the Supreme Court. And I doubt that they would rule in favor of any attempt to weaken the Judicial branch.


43 posted on 10/14/2021 9:13:47 AM PDT by Leaning Right (I have already previewed or do not wish to preview this composition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

When the constitution was written judges probably had the self respect to step down when they started to lose their marbles.


44 posted on 10/14/2021 9:22:21 AM PDT by escapefromboston (Free Chauvin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

I assume you are aware that congress passed a law in 1789 setting the terms of Federal judges to life time terms.

Congress did that, not the constitution.

Life time terms are an invention of Congress under the discretion that the constitution grants them to establsh a judiciary.


45 posted on 10/14/2021 9:24:21 AM PDT by ChronicMA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: HypatiaTaught

I think he was talking about term limits for SC Justices.


46 posted on 10/14/2021 9:27:17 AM PDT by FroggyTheGremlim (I'll be good, I will, I will!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lurkinanloomin
2 conservatives, 3 communists and 4 flip-floppers is not a conservative court.

That's tagline material right there.

You mind if I take that?

47 posted on 10/14/2021 9:32:40 AM PDT by Ouderkirk (Life is about ass, you're either covering, hauling, laughing, kicking, kissing, or behaving like one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ChronicMA

> I assume you are aware that congress passed a law in 1789 setting the terms of Federal judges to life time terms <

I was not aware of that law (the Judiciary Act of 1789) before now, so I looked it up. I could find no mention of judicial terms. So I think Article III of the Constitution still applies - it’s also worth noting that Article III talks about both the Supreme Court and any future inferior courts.

If I missed something here, please let me know.


48 posted on 10/14/2021 9:49:29 AM PDT by Leaning Right (I have already previewed or do not wish to preview this composition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Osage Orange

During Trumps term we saw how much power unelected bureaucrats held. If anyone needs terms limits it’s Federal employees. They actually run the government, not the people we elect.


49 posted on 10/14/2021 9:56:41 AM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Ouderkirk

Be my guest.


50 posted on 10/14/2021 10:29:32 AM PDT by Lurkinanloomin ( (Natural born citizens are born here of citizen parents)(Know Islam, No Peace-No Islam, Know Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Durus
I'll take either...But I'll take Politicians first.

Because I don't think you can term limit unelected folks.

51 posted on 10/14/2021 10:31:49 AM PDT by Osage Orange (1961 VW Two Door Truck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: LibertyWoman

term limit them and you have to term limit yourselves


52 posted on 10/14/2021 10:38:26 AM PDT by butlerweave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Osage Orange

It would be easier to set employment duration limits for federal employees then passing term limits.


53 posted on 10/14/2021 10:47:10 AM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Durus

Take term limits out of the Politicians hands , they can have 1 vote just like everyone else


54 posted on 10/14/2021 11:03:23 AM PDT by butlerweave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

> FDR tried to expand the court, and failed.

FDR got what he wanted though, just by seriously threatening to do so. The court turned into a rubber-stamp for his New Deal policies.


55 posted on 10/14/2021 11:05:44 AM PDT by shaven_llama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: LibertyWoman

The only reform I MIGHT support is a periodic, simple up/down vote on retention for federal judges (to include SCOTUS).


56 posted on 10/14/2021 11:07:43 AM PDT by shaven_llama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ouderkirk

Thanks


57 posted on 10/14/2021 1:39:51 PM PDT by Ouderkirk (2 conservatives, 3 communists and 4 flip-floppers is not a conservative court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson