• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Biden creates commission to study adding Supreme Court justices (4/9/21)

JacksinPA

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 3, 2017
Messages
26,290
Reaction score
16,776
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive

Biden creates commission to study adding Supreme Court justices

The White House says a commission will study ‘the length of service and turnover of justices on the court; the membership and size of the court; and the court’s case selection, rules, and practices’
www.independent.co.uk

The White House says a commission will study ‘the length of service and turnover of justices on the court; the membership and size of the court; and the court’s case selection, rules, and practices’

Today President Biden plans to order a 180-day study of the Supreme Court, including the possibility of adding more justices or setting term limits.

A bipartisan commission, the White House said in a statement, will study “the genesis of the reform debate and the court’s role in the constitutional system; the length of service and turnover of justices on the court; the membership and size of the court; and the court’s case selection, rules, and practices.”

Mr Biden had pledged to create such a commission as a candidate for president, after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg died and former president Donald Trump replaced her with the conservative Amy Coney Barrett, tipping the scale of the court further to the right.
================================================================
FDR looked at 'packing' SCOTUS. Will Joe give the same thing a try?
 

Well, Trump's appointees didn't help him steal the election.

I'm torn on this. I do see merit in adding more judges when you think how much our population has grown. Should 9 people hold this much power over a country of 320 million? I don't know.

But I don't want to see courts packed just to tip back the balance of the court.
 
I think we should leave this issue alone and focus on HR-1
 

The legislative filibuster is purported to create moderation in bills, though that's not really how it panned out in reality. However, the judicial filibuster and blue slips did in fact result in moderation for judicial appointees. It was a shame to see the decimation of blue slips and filibusters eliminated for these, but it is what it is: now that lifetime appointees have been rendered hopelessly partisan, the system has to change. To what, I don't know exactly, but the modus operandi can no longer remain. It needs to be reformed.
 
If the GOP had ever tried this, the bleating claims of Nazi Dictator would be broadcast day and night.

Dozens of polls would be released claiming "nobody in America wants to change the Supreme Court except racists".

100 leftist law professors would sound the alarm that it's a power grab of tyranny.
 
Expanding the supreme court really doesn't make any sense. We already have Twitter, Facebook and all kinds of other apps that the people can use to vote for whoever they believe is guilty. Why not just open justice to the people? Let the people decide what they believe is right and wrong? Wouldn't that be more fair? Wouldn't it be more transparent? Wouldn't it be a more accurate reflection of who we are as a nation? Isn't that the way we all want justice to work?
 

Trump left us with an unfair conservative balance in SCOTUS.
 
Schism said:
If the GOP had ever tried this, the bleating claims of Nazi Dictator would be broadcast day and night.
Click to expand...

Expansion of Georgia’s Supreme Court wins final approval

Governor Nathan Deal’s push to expand the Georgia Supreme Court won final approval Tuesday from the state Senate, when members passed a bill to expand the court by two justices.
www.ajc.com

Ducey signs law adding 2 justices to Arizona Supreme Court

Ducey's move came despite unanimous opposition of sitting justices on the court.
tucson.com
 
JacksinPA said:
Trump left us with an unfair conservative balance in SCOTUS.
Click to expand...
So what you REALLY want is a liberal court. You REALLY don't care about transparency, fairness, the law, the Constitution or anything else. What you REALLY want is a court that sees everything your way and rules in a way you favor. Essentially it's not really about America or Justice, it's about you.

Yeah, that sounds EXACTLY like the direction America is heading.
 
He did say he was going to do have this sort of commission. Not terribly surprising.
 
Possibly. But I doubt it would fly, even with a study like this. But before we vilify Biden over this, let us remember that politicians from either side has suggested doing so over the many decades since FDR.

And don’t get too self-righteous if you do vilify Biden: the right’s response to losing the election is to move the goalposts for people to vote...over widespread voter fraud that no one can seem to produce evidence for....
 

I always liked the idea of 13 judges
12 associates (12 like a jury)
1 chief (like the judge)

BUT by no means would I want a "packed" court in any way, F that!

I hate the idea that we even label judges left-right-moderate etc and that they even participate in that labeling, they should avoid it as much as possible. If we are picking the right judges they should be above all that nonsense. . . . something else I would like to see stamped out are actually basic qualifications of a real judge . . .

I think other issues are more important right now like voting rights and gerrymandering etc

What could tie into this though that I think is also important is the idea that I think our checks and balances are way off and the grey area of presidential power is also off. So fixing that balance and eliminating locked government could very well encompass this.
 
Ah, Comrade Beijing Joey getting further marching orders I see
 

I hope he will seize the opportunity to finally seat a " clean & articulate " poor non-black African American who is " as smart as a white kid "
You know his state " was a slave state " , right ?
Biden Discovers Clean, Articulate Black Man | The Opinion Wiki | Fandom

I hope he can find another one .

FLASHBACK: Biden Touted 'Slave State' Delaware in Southern Strategy (freebeacon.com)

 
Because the courts use an undefined qualifier in the term 'widespread'. Just what is widespread voter fraud? 2 cases? 26? How about 100? All we do know at the moment is the fraud documented that did not meet the widespread criteria, is however, acceptable level of voter fraud.

So what is the benchmark? How do we know when our current level of acceptable fraud ascends into widespread fraud? Then we can start to gripe?
 

I have no problem with balancing the court but mostly we need to overhaul the SC.
 

When you have verifiable claims that aren’t generated just to dispute an election outcome you didn’t like.
 

The GOP just led a literal insurrection to try to overturn election results they didn’t like.
 
Aunt Antifa said:
When you have verifiable claims that aren’t generated just to dispute an election outcome you didn’t like.
Click to expand...
Like I said. It's an undefined metric however deemed acceptable
 
The fact of the matter is, the Supreme Court has been conservative for the last 30 or more years. Senate manipulations now makes the court conservative for another 30 years. A seemingly permanent consensus is a contradiction of democracy and is not healthy in its institutions.
 
Reactions: JMR
VySky said:
Like I said. It's an undefined metric however deemed acceptable
Click to expand...

It’s not undefined. it would have to be enough to tip the scale. And the numbers aren’t even close to that. Most voter fraud is just someone screwing something up vs trying something illegal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…