Current Events > The Democrats introduced legislation to pack the supreme court.

(+) Yeah! (+)

They want to add 4 new justices.

I could've sworn Joe Biden said he wouldn't pack the court dozens of times while campaigning. Who could've seen this coming?

Oh well, I'll continue to live my life as I see fit, and if it conflicts with this new tyrannical party's views, oh well.

---

PaunchyTurtle53 posted...

They want to add 4 new justices.

I could've sworn Joe Biden said he wouldn't pack the court dozens of times while campaigning. Who could've seen this coming?

Oh well, I'll continue to live my life as I see fit, and if it conflicts with this new tyrannical party's views, oh well.

Biden is part of the legislative branch and said hed sign it?

Joe Biden introduced the legislation?

---

Sounds good to me

---

The democrats are doing that?

Cool.

---

PaunchyTurtle53 posted...

tyrannical party

Imagine saying this after the hell Trump put us through.

---

Oh yeah, because he's totally going to veto it and call it unconstitutional. My bad guys. If you think he won't pass it the moment it hits his desk, you're dreaming.

That said, if he DID veto it, he'd absolutely earn my respect, and I'd probably warm up to him.

But that won't happen.

---

PaunchyTurtle53 posted...

Oh well, I'll continue to live my life as I see fit

With continued ignorance of how the US government functions?

---

Turtle also said it's wrong to confirm a new Supreme Court Justice under a lame duck President, which turned out to be a lie.

---

*x-ray camera on OP's skull, revealing it contains nothing but a stationary cymbal monkey covered in cobwebs*

---

Musourenka posted...

The democrats are doing that?

Cool.

My party is doing it? Cool

The party I dont like is doing it? OMG this is outrageous

politics in a nutshell

Damn, I didn't think they were gonna try it.

Fucking good for them.

---

Remember folks, ONLY Republicans are allowed to break precedence and decorum.

---

the best argument I've seen for this is that the USSC is "overworked", which...well I don't know how you would quantify that. I'm sure people that have to prepare their cases for the court feel overworked, too.
totally unnecessary.

PaunchyTurtle53 posted...

Oh yeah, because he's totally going to veto it and call it unconstitutional

It's not unconstitutional.

---

TC your failing your father's request.

---

American government is just gonna be a rotating tyranny every 4 years

---

PaunchyTurtle53 posted...

could've sworn Joe Biden said he wouldn't pack the court dozens of times while campaigning. Who could've seen this coming?

What he actually said was he would form a commission to study court packing - weigh the pros and cons, etc.


---

Unsugarized_Foo posted...

American government is just gonna be a rotating tyranny every 4 years

The current goal is to make it impossible for the GOP and their 40% base from assuming power ever again.

So ideally, not really rotating tyranny lol

---

Maybe republicans should have thought about this before they jammed through the handmaiden's tale woman. Was it worth it? She didn't even go along with Trump's lies either.

---

Doom_Art posted...

The current goal is to make it impossible for the GOP and their 40% base from assuming power ever again.

So ideally, not really rotating tyranny lol

I guess just one group in power is better

---

CommonGrackle posted...

the best argument I've seen for this is that the USSC is "overworked", which...well I don't know how you would quantify that. I'm sure people that have to prepare their cases for the court feel overworked, too.
totally unnecessary.

the best argument i've seen for it is there's absolutely no argument against it other than "tradition!" which is actually an argument for it, since it gives way to the sort of shenanigans we saw during the last four years.

shenanigans give way to more shenanigans.

---

I don't understand how people can think this is a good thing. Sure you might like the immediate results, but now you've set a precedent that republicans can just pack their own courts when they inevitably get elected again.

---

Unsugarized_Foo posted...

I guess just one group in power is better

Factually correct, when its not the group that is transparently evil

---

Doom_Art posted...

The current goal is to make it impossible for the GOP and their 40% base from assuming power ever again.

So ideally, not really rotating tyranny lol

Maybe the GOP should adopt a platform that the majority of Americans support. Actually try to participate in a representative democracy.

---

Uhhh, does the supreme court have enough seats for more justices? I bet they're gonna have to add more seats to the bench AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE!!!!!!!!

TheGoldenEel posted...

Factually correct, when its not the group that is transparently evil

And when it is?

---

doomcrusader posted...

I don't understand how people can think this is a good thing. Sure you might like the immediate results, but now you've set a precedent that republicans can just pack their own courts when they inevitably get elected again.

yup, when this happens with Republicans I dont wanna hear any complaints.

PaunchyTurtle53 posted...

That said, if he DID veto it, he'd absolutely earn my respect, and I'd probably warm up to him.

Oh good, that's really one of Biden's biggest worries.

---

doomcrusader posted...

republicans can just pack their own courts when they inevitably get elected again.

Doom_Art posted...

The current goal is to make it impossible for the GOP and their 40% base from assuming power ever again.

---

Really, we need to completely reorganize the Courts. More circuits, more judges, all the way up and down.
This bill is just a shot across the bow though. Itll never pass under present circumstances.

Unsugarized_Foo posted...

I guess just one group in power is better

When it's not the group threatening to overturn results and overthrow the government when they lose a fair election, then yes, it is vastly more preferable.

---

Bleuets posted...

My party is doing it? Cool

The party I dont like is doing it? OMG this is outrageous

politics in a nutshell

Unsugarized_Foo posted...

American government is just gonna be a rotating tyranny every 4 years

This. I guess people really don't understand the what this entails. That whoever happens to find themselves in power can just do whatever they want to get more. Disappointing.

doomcrusader posted...

I don't understand how people can think this is a good thing. Sure you might like the immediate results, but now you've set a precedent that republicans can just pack their own courts when they inevitably get elected again.

Complete_Idi0t posted...

Uhhh, does the supreme court have enough seats for more justices? I bet they're gonna have to add more seats to the bench AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE!!!!!!!!

I laughed.

---

PaunchyTurtle53 posted...

Oh yeah, because he's totally going to veto it and call it unconstitutional.

Why on Earth would he ever call it unconstitutional? Do you think the President can only veto unconstitutional laws or something?

doomcrusader posted...

Sure you might like the immediate results, but now you've set a precedent that republicans can just pack their own courts when they inevitably get elected again.

Precedent for adding more seats to the Supreme Court has been set for over two centuries at this point.

the correct course of action is to do away with the "lifetime appointment" bullshit.

But that'll happen around the same time as congress imposes term limits on itself, so...

---

ElatedVenusaur posted...

Itll never pass under present circumstances.

sure, it'll require an end to the filibuster and an end to the practice of unanimous consent to initiate senate operations

which is fine by me so long as we pass voting rights legislation that effectively forces republicans to abandon most of their platform to be electable

all this talk of "republicans will do it too!" seems to ignore the fact that republicans just spent four years doing this

---

Pack it nice and tight...

---

DrizztLink posted...

Oh good, that's really one of Biden's biggest worries.

Yeah, because I'm an individual. And can't possibly represent the opinion of anyone else.

The point is that if he vetos it, he'd earn the respect of a large crowd of people, such as myself, who currently think he's doing an awful job.

Dumbass.

---

CyricZ posted...

The current goal is to make it impossible for the GOP and their 40% base from assuming power ever again.

Totally realistic and plausible.

---

DarkBuster22904 posted...

the correct course of action is to do away with the "lifetime appointment" bullshit.

But that'll happen around the same time as congress imposes term limits on itself, so...

This.


---

PaunchyTurtle53 posted...

Yeah, because I'm an individual. And can't possibly represent the opinion of anyone else.

The point is that if he vetos it, he'd earn the respect of a large crowd of people, such as myself, who currently think he's doing an awful job.

Dumbass.

we know he'll never earn your respect

nazi

---

DarkBuster22904 posted...

the correct course of action is to do away with the "lifetime appointment" bullshit.

You can't constitutionally implement term limits on the judicial branch but you can expand the number of seats.

doomcrusader posted...

Totally realistic and plausible.

Just because you got a hefty goal doesn't mean you shouldn't try working for it. ;)

---

How is packing the courts bad?

---

also, here's an actual source

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/democrats-introduce-bill-expand-supreme-court-9-13-justices-n1264132

The Supreme Court can be expanded by an act of Congress, but the legislation is highly unlikely to become law in the near future given Democrats' slim majorities, which include scores of lawmakers who are not on board with the idea. President Joe Biden has said he is "not a fan" of packing the court.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told reporters on Thursday she has "no plans to bring it to the floor."
"I don't know that that's a good idea or bad idea. I think it's an idea that should be considered," she said of the court expansion plan. "And I think the president's taking the right approach to have a commission to study such a thing. It's a big step."

---

ignoring TC's clickbait bullshit, supreme court reform needs to happen. packing it likely isn't the way, but enforcing a term limit or turning it into a rotating body drawing from a pool of federal judges are a logical path towards that reform.

after the partisan bullshit pulled by republicans, where they crippled the court for a year to block obama's appointment, its clear that the current system is broken.

---

PaunchyTurtle53 posted...

Yeah, because I'm an individual. And can't possibly represent the opinion of anyone else.

The point is that if he vetos it, he'd earn the respect of a large crowd of people, such as myself, who currently think he's doing an awful job.

Dumbass.

My fragile feelings.

---

doomcrusader posted...

Totally realistic and plausible.

Not with that attitude.

Unless you're okay with the idea of handing the country over to insurrectionists.

---

PaunchyTurtle53 posted...

Yeah, because I'm an individual. And can't possibly represent the opinion of anyone else.

The point is that if he vetos it, he'd earn the respect of a large crowd of people, such as myself, who currently think he's doing an awful job.

Dumbass.

no one cares what you think because if you think these 3 months are an "awful job" then you have literally 0 idea what happened over the last 4 years.