were in charge? What could go wrong?
Link: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/04/14/report-democrats-to-unveil-court-packing-bill-expands-supreme-court-to-13/
Merrick Garland
Neil Gorsuch
Brett Kavanaugh
Amy Coney Barrett
Gag us with your “outrage” ladle.
Chris is correct. The Court will remain a nine justice panel.
Constitutional election consequences prevented you from flipping Scalia’s spot with Garland, nothing more, and nothing less.
And your party’s decision under Harry Reid to open judge placement to simple majorities votes in the senate in 2013 combined with the President Trump’s unexpected victory opened the door for Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.
Interestingly, you always fail to recall that Chuck Schumer said that he was planning to use the same 50 vote majority on SCOTUS nominee as Reid had used on federal judge appointments during the lead up to what he expected to be Hillary’s coronation in Nov 2016
You fixed the game and then subsequently lost at it.
Elections have consequences - even suspicious nonID elections.
You will change the rules again if you can, and there is nothing to block it constitutionally. It will be incredibly foolish, but you will do it in the same heartbeat that you would have applied Reid’s Rule.
But there is that little Manchin problem, isn’t there? Pesky voters!
Let us all hope that Elections still have consequences.
When politicians want to look like they are addressing an issue, but really want nothing to happen, they appoint a commission to study the issue.
When they want to make sure that commission has no effect, they tell it to take a lot of time. And they shape its mandate.
This commission is going to take 6 months and - most importantly - it is not going to make any specific recommendations.
Some members of the House are acting now precisely because the Left is mad about the Biden actions. You wouldn’t know that, because you get all your information from Tucker and Breitbart.
Nothing will happen with the Court.
(no message)
....if Schumer can get Manchin and Sinnema on board, they will do it in a heartbeat. If they can’t, then it will go as you say and they will have legitimately tried to stack the court - not to appease the far left, but because they want all of the power to convert our country as soon as they possibly can with a razor thin, non voter ID majority.
Not part of the mandate.
Nothing will happen. By design.
cases like "California v. Texas" (re: ACA), "Fulton v. City of Philadelphia" (re: Gay Rights), or "Arizona Republican Party v. Democratic National Committee" (re: Voting Rights), there's likely to be more attention paid to that otherwise perfunctory exercise. Given the clear effort by McConnell and his cohorts to "pack" the court their way, it would be increasingly challenging for Biden to hold off the "reformers".
Link: https://nwsidebar.wsba.org/2020/12/09/8-cases-to-watch-at-the-u-s-supreme-court-in-2020-2021/
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
...then again...
(no message)
Let’s see if he keeps his word- if not his political career will be over when he runs for re-election or another term as Governor. My guess is he will block Biden’s more draconian measures. Not that Biden is actually in charge.
(no message)
Since Wallace wouldn't make him answer it, Trump, justifiably, asked him again and again, "Why won't you answer that question."
We all understand now why Biden wouldn't answer that question, or, more accurately, why he was told not to answer that question.