|
Concerned Citizen posted:is there any scenario where court packing doesn't quickly descend into constitutional crisis levels of absurdity? like in order to do it, first you'd have to abolish the legislative filibuster (since the court size is set by law, not just precedent). then you'd probably be declaring nuclear option to remove all rules that allow the minority to obstruct. after that, you are just confirming as many justices as you can - literally hundreds - as there is absolutely no reason to not do that. and as soon as the gop gets a senate majority/wh combo again, they then do the exact same thing back. i don't see how it's a desirable or realistic path. the republic is dead dude, dont worry about breaking it further
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 01:21 |
|
|
i think the objective here is to ensure that the GOP never gets back into power. its what they've been doing for decades, just much faster
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:is there any scenario where court packing doesn't quickly descend into constitutional crisis levels of absurdity? like in order to do it, first you'd have to abolish the legislative filibuster (since the court size is set by law, not just precedent). then you'd probably be declaring nuclear option to remove all rules that allow the minority to obstruct. after that, you are just confirming as many justices as you can - literally hundreds - as there is absolutely no reason to not do that. and as soon as the gop gets a senate majority/wh combo again, they then do the exact same thing back. i don't see how it's a desirable or realistic path. it would mean changing from a system where one party can win a decades-long veto on legislation through sheer luck to a system where unified control of the Senate and the executive also means control of the courts, which I don’t think is actually a huge disaster
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:is there any scenario where court packing doesn't quickly descend into constitutional crisis levels of absurdity? unlike right now, which is perfectly fine
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:35
|
|
|
Zoran posted:it would mean changing from a system where one party can win a decades-long veto on legislation through sheer luck to a system where unified control of the Senate and the executive also means control of the courts, which I don’t think is actually a huge disaster Lol it wasn't luck
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
i am screaming death
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i don't see how it's a desirable or realistic path. "I don't see how it will make me lots of money, so why bother doing it?" - the lanyard thought process at its finest
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:38
|
|
|
Zoran posted:it would mean changing from a system where one party can win a decades-long veto on legislation through sheer luck to a system where unified control of the Senate and the executive also means control of the courts, which I don’t think is actually a huge disaster How dare my enemies constantly win over and over and get their way , and even when my team has been in control they just support my enemy's policies with nicer language This is intolerable
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:39
|
|
|
Serf posted:i think the objective here is to ensure that the GOP never gets back into power. its what they've been doing for decades, just much faster What if my objective is to guillotine the current crop of democrats?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:40
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sq_Fm7qfRQk
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:42
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:What if my objective is to guillotine the current crop of democrats? we'll call that phase 2
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:42
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:as soon as the gop gets a senate majority/wh combo again, they then do the exact same thing back. i don't see how it's a desirable or realistic path. the point is that you're not going to lose anymore if you're actually good at politics
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:42
|
|
|
The underlying idea of this is that with Citizens United, gerrymandering, and voter suppression (all enabled by this court) America is no longer ruled with the consent of the governed. Therefore it is necessary to replace or overturn this court that has failed its constitutional duty to guard our democratic norms.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
capitalism is incompatible with democracy
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:45
|
|
|
like the entire project of the Republicans has been to be in power permanently. They even thought they had it with Reagan going into HW Bush The point of politics is to win, all the time. You don't plan on what happens when the pendulum swings back the other way, you run the table so that it never does
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:47
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:They brought it back with new gays. Ted is looking real tired on Chopped
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:47
|
|
|
Feldegast42 posted:The underlying idea of this is that with Citizens United, gerrymandering, and voter suppression (all enabled by this court) America is no longer ruled with the consent of the governed. Therefore it is necessary to replace or overturn this court that has failed its constitutional duty to guard our democratic norms. insane as it may be to say, this is accurate
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:48
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:is there any scenario where court packing doesn't quickly descend into constitutional crisis levels of absurdity? like in order to do it, first you'd have to abolish the legislative filibuster (since the court size is set by law, not just precedent). then you'd probably be declaring nuclear option to remove all rules that allow the minority to obstruct. after that, you are just confirming as many justices as you can - literally hundreds - as there is absolutely no reason to not do that. and as soon as the gop gets a senate majority/wh combo again, they then do the exact same thing back. i don't see how it's a desirable or realistic path. Don't worry dude its not gonna happen. Your gravy train is safe.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:51
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:like the entire project of the Republicans has been to be in power permanently. They even thought they had it with Reagan going into HW Bush You can basically lump Clinton in there and consider it an unbroken run from 1980 to the humongous financial crash. Then realize that Obama was operating identicallty to W. And trying to cut social security and whatnot and well, here we are 40 straight years of republican policies. What did Clinton and Obama even accomplish ? Ending welfare and implementing a 1990s wealth transfer to insurance companies? Wow guys it sure is important that their party be in power forever
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 16:53
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:the point is that you're not going to lose anymore if you're actually good at politics I feel like even if you were "good at politics" you still wouldn't a mechanism that would allow knee-jerk changes like that to be rapidly implemented lest your political rivals, or death eaters, or whatever do the same thing to you as soon as they get into power.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:I feel like even if you were "good at politics" you still wouldn't a mechanism that would allow knee-jerk changes like that to be rapidly implemented lest your political rivals, or death eaters, or whatever do the same thing to you as soon as they get into power. lol leaving weapons on the table for the republicans to use against you is the strategy that's been so successful these past 20 years
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:13
|
|
|
Al! posted:lol leaving weapons on the table for the republicans to use against you is the strategy that's been so successful these past 20 years Nah, I'm saying you remove the weapons (after you use them).
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:14
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:You can basically lump Clinton in there and consider it an unbroken run from 1980 to the humongous financial crash. Then realize that Obama was operating identicallty to W. And trying to cut social security and whatnot and well, here we are longer than 40 years, carter ran as a conservative and ford is enough of a footnote to ignore if he was conservative or not
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:16
|
|
|
- pack the courts w hundreds of new judges/justices - get courts to issue rulings concentrating into the judiciary power normally reserved to the legislature and executive and h*ck power normally reserved to the amendment process - courts use that power to make themselves a parliament w the circuit appeals courts acting as regional administrative parliaments - madisonian system finally abolished - schedule parliamentary elections bing bong binch
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:17
|
|
|
Controlled opposition party ran by industry lobby
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:18
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:is there any scenario where court packing doesn't quickly descend into constitutional crisis levels of absurdity? we're already at constitutional crisis levels of absurdity. the only question is whether we're willing to admit it and the problem isn't just the Congressional GOP. even the Court itself is shredding its own legitimacy. contradictory opinions where the only consistent legal principle is "the conservatives always win". stomping on centuries of constitutional precedent. openly signaling their intention to overrule fundamental civil rights decisions. ruling on things that the Supreme Court is Constitutionally prohibited from ruling on. and now a justice colluding with the administration to decide his successor in exchange for retiring at the most politically advantageous time? face it - McConnell isn't the only cat turning the Court into a litterbox
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:21
|
|
|
Counterpoint: Consolidate federal legalcenters
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:24
|
|
|
Realistically, if anyone's gonna pack the court, it's gonna be Trump handing out Supreme Court seats like candy once he finds out he (theoretically) can.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:24
|
|
|
docbeard posted:Realistically, if anyone's gonna pack the court, it's gonna be Trump handing out Supreme Court seats like candy once he finds out he (theoretically) can. unless he hands out 200m seats or so, you can always pack the court with more supreme court justices to counteract who he stuffs into the courts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:45
|
|
|
Pack the court with every single person in the us Actual democracy Jobs guarantee Reasonable jurisprudance
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:53
|
|
|
the republicans already packed the court when they stole the garland seat and denying that isn't going to change that fact
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:53
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:the republicans already packed the court when they stole the garland seat and denying that isn't going to change that fact thats the subtly distinct stacking of the court
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:we're already at constitutional crisis levels of absurdity. the only question is whether we're willing to admit it what'd they rule on that the court isn't allowed to
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 18:08
|
|
|
Squizzle posted:thats the subtly distinct stacking of the court tired: packing wired: stacking
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 18:08
|
|
|
why aren't the republicans trying to pack the courts
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 18:09
|
|
|
nah posted:why aren't the republicans trying to pack the courts they already did
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 18:10
|
|
|
Squizzle posted:thats the subtly distinct stacking of the court stack the court as high as possible then bring out the slammer 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 18:13
|
|
|
Gorsuch is just payback for souter. A lineup of Rehnquist, bork, Scalia, Thomas and either Kennedy or O'Connor should have existed since the early 90s
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 18:14
|
|
|
nah posted:why aren't the republicans trying to pack the courts 5-4 is just as good as 1,000-4 Also they're totally putting scores of Federalist Society endorsed judges at every level of the courts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 01:21 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/WSJRealEstate/status/999684007192420353
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 18:15
|
|