RIP RBG

CunningCanuk · Sep 19, 2020

Unclebaldrick said:
He'll do it. It will be after the election and probably after they lose the Senate and White House. It'll be the ultimate lame duck fuck you like the bunch of Wisconsin cunts did right after they lost the governor's race. The right wing has no respect for the Constitution or the country as a whole and will use any means they can, no matter how un-American, to personally gain.

These crap-balls will be flushed but now its going to take twenty years for the stink to clear.

Clarence Thomas had better stay away from windows.

If there is no constitutional requirement limiting the amount of SC justices, couldn’t they simply increase the number of justices to balance the court?

Of course that could only work if the existing SC isn’t used to steal the election and the Democrats have control of the White House and the Senate.

SpawnOfVader · Sep 19, 2020

CunningCanuk said:
If there is no constitutional requirement limiting the amount of SC justices, couldn’t they simply increase the number of justices to balance the court?

Of course that could only work if the existing SC isn’t used to steal the election and the Democrats have control of the White House and the Senate.

I've seen this theorized many places. You're right the number of justices is set by Congress NOT the Constitution....
Historically it has ranged from 5-10 members, they almost expanded it just to get the new deal passed... and yes it would be the best counter/course of action if the dems sweep this election.

Unclebaldrick · Sep 19, 2020

CunningCanuk said:
If there is no constitutional requirement limiting the amount of SC justices, couldn’t they simply increase the number of justices to balance the court?

Of course that could only work if the existing SC isn’t used to steal the election and the Democrats have control of the White House and the Senate.

FDR tried it and failed. It's a bad move and a considerable escalation of the chaos in our government and another step toward abandoning the Constitution for good

SpawnOfVader · Sep 19, 2020

schuylaar said:
you can't appoint a new Justice in an election year.

100% incorrect. 24 supreme court openings have come up during election years since the forming of the country- 21 of those were filled before the election. What the republicans pulled on Obama was the oddity.

SpawnOfVader · Sep 19, 2020

Unclebaldrick said:
FDR tried it and failed. It's a bad move and a considerable escalation of the chaos in our government and another step toward abandoning the Constitution for good

There is NOTHING in the constitution about the amount of judges- thats set by congress and already fluctuates. Would you like to see my sources?

CunningCanuk · Sep 19, 2020

Unclebaldrick said:
FDR tried it and failed. It's a bad move and a considerable escalation of the chaos in our government and another step toward abandoning the Constitution for good

That makes sense. I’m just throwing shit out there grasping at straws. Desperate times and all......

SpawnOfVader · Sep 19, 2020

CunningCanuk said:
That makes sense. I’m just throwing shit out there grasping at straws. Desperate times and all......

This has popped up in a lot of political theories right now. It's totally a legal and viable option.... and a larger court would be less prone to swings due to a single member dying.

hanimmal · Sep 19, 2020

I would bet it wouldn't be Biden that would up the number on the SCOTUS if he wins. If anything I think it would be more likely to be a 2024 issue.

schuylaar · Sep 19, 2020

SpawnOfVader said:
100% incorrect. 24 supreme court openings have come up during election years since the forming of the country- 21 of those were filled before the election. What the republicans pulled on Obama was the oddity.

you can't appoint a new Justice in an election year.

Moldy · Sep 19, 2020

Herb & Suds said:
Mitch already said he will fill that slot
He said because the Senate and President are of the same party it validates allowing Trump to choose
My bet it will be Tom Cotton and we are screwed for our lifetime

Tom Cotton - The guy that wants to use our military to kill protestors. That'll be fucking special.

Herb & Suds · Sep 19, 2020

schuylaar said:
you can't appoint a new Justice in an election year.

Unless it's a republican pick

SpawnOfVader · Sep 19, 2020

Herb & Suds said:
Unless it's a republican pick

Lol I see this argument everywhere but it's facile... I think it's because of how many young people are getting on and only remember the issue with Obama's pick getting pushed off. That's one of 3 times that's happened in 200+ years. The other 21 times an opening came up during an election year they DID appoint a judge before the election.

SpawnOfVader · Sep 19, 2020

SpawnOfVader said:
Lol I see this argument everywhere but it's facile... I think it's because of how many young people are getting on and only remember the issue with Obama's pick getting pushed off. That's one of 3 times that's happened in 200+ years. The other 21 times an opening came up during an election year they DID appoint a judge before the election.

**Personal note- I think that it SHOULD be a law that nominees don't get pushed through during an election year BUT that's not where the current situation is.

Jimdamick · Sep 19, 2020

tangerinegreen555 · Sep 19, 2020

Unclebaldrick said:
FDR tried it and failed. It's a bad move and a considerable escalation of the chaos in our government and another step toward abandoning the Constitution for good

FDR tried for 13 justices if I'm not mistaken, I'd settle for 11. Lol.

If Hillary's 3 million more votes would have won the election, there would be no dry humper Kavanaugh or Gorsuch on the court. When was the last time a republican president won the popular vote? 2004 by an incumbent who lost the popular vote in 2000? The point being there are issues with the constitution to begin with.

What do the 2016 Bernie Babies think? Bunch of dumb asses have given up the court until they're too old to get anything out of it. Brilliant work, thanks a lot.

In the end, there are still members of the court past their life expectancy, people die everyday and there's an election in 6 weeks.

We all know what to do. And that's to vote against those laughing assholes who were throwing parties last night and sending disgusting texts.

Everytime somebody good dies, there are people who love it. I still remember the MLK jokes from the days after his death.

He was right though, "society is sick".

Still. Over 50 years later.

schuylaar · Sep 19, 2020

tangerinegreen555 said:
FDR tried for 13 justices if I'm not mistaken, I'd settle for 11. Lol.

If Hillary's 3 million more votes would have won the election, there would be no dry humper Kavanaugh or Gorsuch on the court. When was the last time a republican president won the popular vote? 2004 by an incumbent who lost the popular vote in 2000? The point being there are issues with the constitution to begin with.

What do the 2016 Bernie Babies think? Bunch of dumb asses have given up the court until they're too old to get anything out of it. Brilliant work, thanks a lot.

In the end, there are still members of the court past their life expectancy, people die everyday and there's an election in 6 weeks.

We all know what to do. And that's to vote against those laughing assholes who were throwing parties last night and sending disgusting texts.

Everytime somebody good dies, there are people who love it. I still remember the MLK jokes from the days after his death.

He was right though, "society is sick".

Still. Over 50 years later.

just out of curiosity- what does Sanders have to do with this?^^^^

schuylaar · Sep 19, 2020

SpawnOfVader said:
I've seen this theorized many places.

where?

<chess clock>

CunningCanuk · Sep 19, 2020

schuylaar said:
just out of curiosity- what does Sanders have to do with this?^^^^

Nothing. His supporters who wouldn’t vote for Clinton have a lot to do with it though, and I think that was his/her point.

schuylaar · Sep 19, 2020

CunningCanuk said:
Nothing. His supporters who wouldn’t vote for Clinton have a lot to do with it though, and I think that was his/her point.

what? does the fact that Clinton didn't get off her fat ass and assumed 'it's my turn'- and the country didn't..?

tangerinegreen555 · Sep 19, 2020

schuylaar said:
just out of curiosity- what does Sanders have to do with this?^^^^

A bunch of nitwits wouldn't vote for Hillary last election because she wasn't liberal enough.

You have a short memory.

Elections have consequences. And somebody important died yesterday.

Can you tie all that together?

RIP RBG

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member