RBG passes away | Trump to nominate replacement soon
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
- Status
Correct, but it's not those 3 who likely to overturn Roe vs Wade...
I find it strange that current SC justices have almost no say in choosing candidates or appointees.
Not sure why they would decide such a thing, when their jobs are to make legal rulings.
I get what you are implying, but to have absolutely no say in the vetting process is a bit odd.
Especially in a post that is essentially a lifetime appointment.
I think the problem is that there are so few justices (9), which means the prospect of lifetime appointments weigh heavier on the selection process. If there were 13 or 17 (pick any reasonable odd number) then the risk of a lifetime appointment would be spread more evenly. The lifetime appointment bit is probably not changeable since its in the constitution. The number of justices however isn't and can be changed by a simple majority vote in Congress.
He could mean the Republicans in the Senate, those old white men will definitely be deciding the fate of Roe.
Haven’t seen this grifter in a minute...
I know it’s what he was praying for and he would have ”won” if I did it but feck him I‘d have put a brick through his fat head and shat on the mess It made.
As a point of comparison: Norway, a much smaller country, has 19 supreme court judges. Though most cases are tried by only 5 at a time, important ones are seen by at least 11 and sometimes all of them. There are also no lifetime appointments, but as you say that is not feasible to change in the US.
There almost inherently has to be something wrong with a system which damn near introduces a political crisis on top of an already highly contested election.
High five.
Seems to me the Dems can make a calculated power play without being accused of completely throwing of the conservative advantage right away.
Add DC and PR as states in part as justification to add two justices. Make the balance 6-5 in favor of the conservatives so they cant claim its some kind of way to illegally gain a majority there. Even though we know the Rs would do that without batting an eye.
Two of the conservative justices hypothetically will need to be replaced during a Dem presidency. Use that to further stimulate the base for the next 4-8 yrs.
Of course all this assumes Trump wont come full autocrat circle with the backing of the court.
The bit about adding justices is the nuclear option, which they would be perfectly justified in doing if Biden wins and they reclaim the Senate. If the Republicans are willing to brazenly cheat then they have to be prepared to reap what they sow.
Ya but the tit for tat is what I fear. The decline of the Roman republic has been on my mind a bit recently. While you really can't draw parallels between the two situations for several reasons, the Dems adding justices will further encourage the subversion of democratic norms I fear. Democracies/republics have a better chance of dying with many small cuts rather than a couple of big slices.
You can't think like that with the Republicans, because they'll do it anyway. They don't need provocation, and they never believe Democrat threats of retaliation, so never worry about any blowback.
I thought the low number concern was nonsense, but actually, Canada has 9 for a population of 38M, and the Netherlands 36(!) for a population of 17.5M. So yeah, 9 is pretty low for the US.
Why does the nomination run entirely through political channels though? In the Netherlands, the SC itself produces a shortlist of three candidates from which parliament gets to choose one. That seems a more sensible approach to me; more based on judicial expertise.
Ya but I'm not interested in living in a dictatorship so I'll avoid that line of thinking. Feck the GOP, the only way to ensure they don't mess everything up is to implement laws that secure your own power (increasing senate seats with DC, Puerto Rico, ruthlessly destroying voter suppression/upholding voter rights, scrapping the electoral college if needed) and do so in a way that you have a clear majority of the country on your side. Packing the court will not stop the GOP from doing so when they return to power (no way to close the door behind you) and you will just shorten the amount of time that the Dems can stay in power.
Ya you are right, didn't work that math out in my head. Still, it makes it much harder for the GOP to control the Senate for more than 1 election cycle with the addition of those 4 seats.
I think court packing is unviable for many reasons, but not because of GOP retaliation. Here was a GOP moderate just before Trump's election:
Dems should pack the court with a simple majority vote. After that,they should change the law to require a super majority to change the number again.
I'm surprised the fbi have not brought charges for the false muller claims yet?
It seems a matter of time before he ends up in prison... which in a civil society is probably more appropriate than maiming somebody and defecating on them (and come on in the ce on the caf we really shouldn't resort beyond defecating in his manbag)
To be honest I think that would massively backfire and not only be unpopular but feed the narrative of whole dems not accepting the defeat in the last election.
Pack the court, and give statehood to DC, Puerto Rico and break California in multiple states. Essentially, make a situation for GOP to not be able to control the senate despite losing by multiple points.
Play against GOP on their court. feck being nice.
Who cares if it's unpopular? The GOP certainly don't, they do unpopular things all the time. But they also get shit done. Terrible, immoral, borderline evil shit, but it gets done all the same.
The voters would forget about being angry by the next election.
This.
I would rather see the Dakotas merge and two of Wyoming/Montana/Idaho becoming one state.
It’s time generally, not just in the US, for parties toward the left of the spectrum to stop playing nice and get in the dirt ring. It’s time to get good things done
Too fecking right. The Dems need to punch hard and keep punching the gop. I can't imagine Pelosi or Schumer bothering though.
The dickhead has an OnlyFans and charges $50/month for it.
Wikipedia as his occupation as a Conspiracy theorist, fraudster, Internet troll.
Sooo does this mean Lincoln folks are actually against this? Intriguing.
I would assume so, if not they’d lose all credibility.
They already have no credibility except among people with exceptionally short attention spans.
They are dead even as of the last poll. Will be interesting to the next, post RBG death poll pans out there.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/south-carolina/
Why is that your opinion?
Do you support Trump? McConnel?
Do you believe abortion should be illegal in the US?
What do you think of QAnon?
Do you believe wearing masks and semi-lockdown orders are the greatest violation of rights since slavery?
How do you feel about the recent protests? About the 1619 project?
And more to the point, why would a Canadian care about the next American SCOTUS nominee ?
Somewhat unexpected, no? Since they're presumably actually very conservative and they went radio silent for a while. Wonder if they had a dark night of the soul trying to decide what to do
- Status