Current Events > AOC and Ilhan Omar after Barrett is sworn in: Expand the court.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1320881248861126663

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1320883278476398595

https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1320885268929482752



---

Biden and other spineless Democrats: No

---

Or just win the senate and impeach

---

I mean, are they wrong?

---

Cant win? Change the rules.

Its High School but for grown ups!

---

I mean, you could easily restructure the court: 19 Justices, every presidential term 2 justices are cycled.

---

They should do it. It's far past time they started fighting back.

---

Republicans are pieces of shit that only want everyone else to follow the rules, while they break every single one.

I'd personally prefer to have them exterminated but one step at a time.

---

pegusus123456 posted...

I mean, are they wrong?

---

HBKick18 posted...

Republicans are pieces

This

---

They're right

---

Master_Bass posted...

They should do it. It's far past time they started fighting back.

fighting is too generous, this is like two teams of fish out of the water flopping around trying to slap each other


---

CrimsonRage posted...

what's the point of rules when repubs keep breaking them

What rule did they break here?

ohiostate124 posted...

Cant win? Change the rules.

There's no rule against expanding the court

---

I see this as a fair retaliatory move to what Republicans did with the Supreme Court in the last 4 years.

---

ohiostate124 posted...

Cant win? Change the rules.

Except that's exactly what Republicans did with Merrick Garland.

• Supreme court seat available
• Republicans say it's too close to an election to confirm a justice
• Republicans "set a new precedent" to keep this from happening
• Same situation happens in 2020, Republicans ignore the precedent they set and confirm a justice in the middle of an election.

Not to mention Republicans changing rules in regard to voting, gerrymandering, etc. to suppress votes and keep as much power as they can.

---

pegusus123456 posted...

I mean, are they wrong?

I think so.

The SC is already too political. Yes, the GOP unfairly and hypocritically took advantage of the rules. But I don't think the response is to just add more. They should consider different changes like to term limits or the nomination process.

I like the idea of having the majority and minority leaders in the Senate appoint a nominating committee of equal number of people (doesn't matter how many). The nominating committee would need a majority to send the nominee to the Senate floor.

This way there isn't a party majority present for the nomination process and it requires both parties to agree to some extent.

---

ohiostate124 posted...

Cant win? Change the rules.

Agreed, that is Republicans' only tactic.

---

CableZL posted...

I see this as a fair retaliatory move to what Republicans did with the Supreme Court in the last 4 years.

Here's an idea, put people worth a damn up for office. Also limit terms for judges to 12 years max. Packing the court isn't the way and if people believe in that they're just as bad as the republicans they ostracize.
---

voldothegr8 posted...

Here's an idea, put people worth a damn up for office. Also limit terms for judges to 12 years max. Packing the court isn't the way and if people believe in that they're just as bad as the republicans they ostracize.

The Supreme Court hasn't always had 9 justices. It started with 6.

And the problem here is that Republicans (see: ohiostate124) are proudly displaying that they:

• Don't care about proper decorum
• Don't care about their blatant hypocrisy

What we've seen for the past 12 years or so is that Republicans will do anything to get their way and don't give a crap about anything else, so I don't really care about what anyone thinks about the idea of Democrats retaliating against that.

• Republicans ran with a birther conspiracy theory for 10+ years in attempt to delegitimize Obama's presidency.
• Republicans proudly blocked tons of Obama's judicial appointments. Mitch McConnell proudly laughs about the fact that he's responsible for this.
• Republicans refuse to vote on tons of bills passed by the house, effectively stalling the work of Congress just to ram through a bunch of Trump's judicial appointments.
• Republicans proudly hand-wave Trump's obvious misdeeds when they made a huge deal about Obama's tan suit, Obama's coffee salute, his "57 states" gaffe, etc.

So yeah, spare me the "well you're just as bad" crap. I'm fine with retaliation at this point.

---

Cant they wait until they have the numbers to do so to say that

Returning_CEmen posted...

Cant they wait until they have the numbers to do so to say that

Yeah, I'm sick to death of all this open honesty our politicians are providing.

---

Expand it forever. Make every judge a supreme court judge and just set up a survey monkey poll for everything

---

ohiostate124 posted...

Cant win? Change the rules.

That's literally all they want to do now. Like Donnie said, we're almost freaking tired of winning!

---

Ben Franklin wanted the court at 15.

Franklin was also a ridiculous hypocrite, so I'm not sure whether that matters.

---

Alright.
Take it to 10. Or, leave the next vacancy permanent.

ohiostate124 posted...

Cant win? Change the rules.

See also: Republicans denying Obama an appointment for 9 months because "voters should be heard" but refusing to wait for this election.

---

vigorm0rtis posted...

See also: Republicans denying Obama an appointment for 9 months because "voters should be heard" but refusing to wait for this election.

That is "the rules". The senate can confirm, deny, or mysteriously forget.

shockthemonkey posted...

Ok and the rules about 9 justices?

Article 3 never defined the number of justices. It can be ten-thousand if legislation were passed stating so.

Agreed. We need way more justices so that one "lucky" president can't decide the overarching direction of the Supreme Court (which is supposed to be a check against the executive branch) for at least a generation.

DuneMan posted...

I mean, you could easily restructure the court: 19 Justices, every presidential term 2 justices are cycled.

I like this tbh. gives every president a fairly equal representation over the court. Make retirement mandatory at a certain age (In Canada's supreme court, its at 75) or just cycle out the oldest ones to lessen the chances of judges dying during their term.

Democrats: Trump is a fascist!!

Also democrats: Let's pack the court until we get everything we want by default and make the supreme court and arm of the executive branch.

pegusus123456 posted...

I mean, are they wrong?

Yes

This will set a precedent and turn the Court into the UK House of Lords.

When Republicans reclaim the house/senate they will just expand the court again

You've turned into a partisan poop chute.

Long term it's an awful harmful thing to do.

I mean her logic of "Republicans are cheaters who abuse the system and lie while democrats are cowards" is true but "Let's fuck up the system" is not something to be lauded.

---

Irony posted...

Or just win the senate and impeach

they need 67 votes to impeach. projections have Dems winning only 50-something seats

---

shockthemonkey posted...

The system is already fucked up.

So your solution is to pour more gas on the fire?
---

shockthemonkey posted...

The system is already fucked up.

"The building is on fire so let's set fire to more buildings." is the type of solution I think The Joker would come up with.

---

On_The_Edge posted...

Democrats: Trump is a fascist!!

Also democrats: Let's pack the court until we get everything we want by default and make the supreme court and arm of the executive branch.

I wouldn't support it if Trump weren't trying to rule almost exclusively by executive order-- while not actually filing his executive orders.

---

Expanding the courts is something the Republicans can just do as well.

shockthemonkey posted...

No, my solution is to structurally change the court so that its more likely to stay consistent with public opinion and human rights

Ten justices, rotating ten-year terms, senate super-majority needed for confirmation.

There, that was easy.

shockthemonkey posted...

No, my solution is to structurally change the court so that its more likely to stay consistent with public opinion and human rights

What happens when future republican administrations pack it even further?
---