The scariest thing...

Houhusky said:

RedRocket said:

Houhusky said:

RedRocket said:

RaceBannon said:

RedRocket said:

dnc said:

BleachedAnusDawg said:

dnc said:

BleachedAnusDawg said:

Swaye said:

...isn't Biden beating Trump, it's that the Dems look likely to win the Senate as well. Can you imagine what is about to happen with unified socialist government? Court packing, massive tax hikes, energy dependence again, millions of job losses, National Firearms Database...the list goes on and on...

Scary tim for sure. Help us ACB, you're our only hope...

Also gonna need the Conservative Supremes to all stay alive for the next 4 years. Lose one and it's back to a lib court because that fag Roberts votes with the libs on everything. Bush fucked that appointment up beyond belief.

They're going to pack the court so their lives will be irrelevant.

I tend to not believe that. The Dems are dumb, but doing that loses them at least one chamber of Congress in 2022, and probably the Presidency in 2024. That policy is wildly unpopular with voters.

I don't think the Dems GAF what is popular with voters.

They're out for blood.

The GOP played dirty to get ACB in there. Winners win but yeah DNC is going to retaliate for that move. Im not a fan of the current DNC talking points to pack the courts which is basically just adding justices carte blanche.

Buttigieg had an interesting proposal to depoliticise the process which I guess could still fall under the umbrella of court packing given the current balance. GOP gets 5 justices. DNC gets 5 justices. This initial allotment does not change. Those initial 10 justices appoint 5 more. 15 justices in total. This was floated well before RBG/ACB.

The GOP used existing rules to nominate and vote in favor of a Supreme Court Justice

Nothing dirty about it at all

Thanks to Harry Reid it was possible. Maybe the dems can change some more stuff that blows up in their face

The playing dirty is setting a precedent that if you control congress you delay or expedite court appointments until you get your guy into the executive office. It's supposed to be an apolitical office.

Playing dirty is not hearing an appointment for Garland on the grounds that it was an election year and then ramming through ACB a month before the election. I never said that it was against the rules but it was massively hypocritical.

2016 Obama was a democrat, the Senate was controlled by republicans

2020 Trump is a Republican, the senate was controlled by republicans

This isn't complicated

Mind blown...so whoever controls senate can just delay an appointment for how long?

Your mind is blown that a branch of the legislature can exercise a check on the power of the executive making a life long appointment into the judicial??? Thats the entire fucking point.

No wonder you are peddling Beto type ideas...

JFC you are talking about breaking down judges by republican vs democrat (as if no other political party does/could exist) and then having its own body pick additional justices...

Read a god damn book , Start with the federalist papers, maybe Hamilton's (that guy from the spoken word musical was actually a real guy!) No. 76.

So how long can the senate delay a judicial appointment? It's not a check against the executive branch if the senate is just refusing to do its elected duty. The way things are going the controlling party is just going to just refuse to hear any appointments if the other party controls the executive and makes the nomination. Or worse continual court packing.

The politicization of the judiciary is not a radical idea and most agree that it's a bad thing. I never said that I think Buttigieg's idea is the best approach or that I even support it. I do appreciate that he at least calls attention to the issue and puts an idea out there. Also you seem to not understand the proposal. It doesn't matter what the judge's political affiliation is. The judges are nominated by the GOP/DEM members of the senate. The GOP senate block could nominate a liberal judge and vice versa.

Thanks for the list of books.

So how long can the senate delay a judicial appointment? Forever, as both sides had done previously with judicial appointments. The Constitutional requirement is that the Senate has to affirmatively consent to the Presidential appointment. That's it. They can affirmatively consent or not affirmatively consent. There is no requirement for a vote or a hearing.