Packing the Court

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by theiioftx, Apr 15, 2021.

  1. theiioftx

    theiioftx Sponsor Deputy

    Democrats launching legislation to pack the court and also plan to kill the filibuster. I think they will have a hard time passing the legislation, but it tells you about how democrats do not care about democracy,

    I'll say it once again. If you voted for Biden you are an idiot.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. humahuma

    humahuma 500+ Posts

    What do you call all the dead people who voted for Biden?

    Court packing should get both sides up in arms, but sadly libs will watch fake news CNN and buy into it.
     
  3. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Not an idiot. Un-American. Everything (most things) Biden campaigned on was un-American.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    And I think all votes for Trump were un American.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • WTF? WTF? x 1
    • poop poop x 1
  5. HornHuskerDad

    HornHuskerDad 5,000+ Posts

    The court-packing is clearly an attempt at a power-grab by the far left. They feel that the Constitution is a roadblock to their agenda, and they resent any Justices who adhere to the precepts of the Constitution. These idoits must be stopped! Hopefully the razor-thin Democratic control of the Senate will develop a crack or two by having some semi-sensible Democratic Senators see the folly of court-packing as the liberal power-grab that it is.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. AustinHorn24

    AustinHorn24 250+ Posts

    I dont agree with court packing. We need much more fundamental change to our court system.

    The founding fathers made the mistake of assigning too much power to SCOTUS and the constitution should be amended.

    The power discrepancy shows up in the imbalance of checks. For executive branch or Congress to "check" SCOTUS they have to wait for the judges to die or retire. The process for impeachment is absurd requiring 2/3 senate confirmation.

    Meanwhile the checks that SCOTUS has against the executive and legislative branches can be exercised with very little effort.
     
  7. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    Can someone explain to me how a static number of justices and the fillibuster are the sanctimonious hill to die on?

    Supreme Court justices have been a little fluid - at least in the first century of the republic. The number changed 6 times. It was brought DOWN to 7 in 1866 and increased to 9 (one per US Circuit Court) in 1869. There are 13 now. We had 37 states at the time, for comparison.

    The fillibuster is a stupid rule. "The first Senate filibuster occurred in 1837 when a group of Whig senators filibustered to prevent allies of the Democratic-Republican President Andrew Jackson from expunging a resolution of censure against him." Ironically he was a Trumpy douche back then.
     
  8. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    Had McConnell not dangled Merick Garland as he did for so long this court packing wouldn't be a discussion. Sometimes when you play silly games you win silly prizes.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  9. HornHuskerDad

    HornHuskerDad 5,000+ Posts

    OUBubba, I have to agree with you on this point. IMO, Mitch made a mistake by refusing to consider Garland. Obama was doing his Constitutional duty by naming a prospective appointment to fill a vacancy on SCOTUS. And the Senate has a Constitutional duty to confirm (or deny) the appointment. It would have been very simple for Mitch to bring the Garland nomination to the Senate, hold hearings, and vote to deny.
     
  10. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    The founders didn't give the Court the kind of power it currently asserts. Remember, the first Chief Justice quit to run for Governor of New York. That'll give you an idea of what the founding fathers of the power of the Court. Can anyone imagine John Roberts doing that? Hell no.

    The Court's power comes entirely from the other branches simply not being willing to challenge them. Congress never impeaches justices (or even seriously threatens them), and the President dutifully enforces their orders whether he thinks they're legally right or not. The founders didn't intend for that to occur, and it doesn't have to work that way.
     
  11. horninchicago

    horninchicago 10,000+ Posts

    Nice comeback, Potsie.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    Thanks mouth![​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. mb227

    mb227 2,500+ Posts

    Dead idiots.
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    That's either a well played joke or a threat.

    I go with A. Well done.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Hot Hot x 1
  15. theiioftx

    theiioftx Sponsor Deputy

    The point is that the worst of the worst democrats trotted out to say “hey we want justices that vote for our programs so we will just add enough to get there.” Come 4 years from now when the republicans have both houses and the POTUS, they will just add 4 more. I believe the court stands at 5-4 as Roberts is a pos liberal.
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2021
  16. mb227

    mb227 2,500+ Posts

    Concur. We are rapidly devolving into a nation that will have 15 different parties and where NOTHING ever gets done precisely because by the time some manner of consensus is reached, the term has expired and the Legislature gaveled.

    We are also rapidly moving into the phase of a Constitutional Convention, during which the next Civil War SHALL commence in order to try and prevent the woke from codifying all of the microaggression nonsense...

    Today's speech about the expansion of the court made clear that it is about woke politics. There was at least one speaker talking about no persons with Native heritage and whatnot. That 'lived experience' is simply not required to be an interpreter of the Constitution and how it applied to the controversy at hand.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    Stupid ish like this will lead to drastic rules changes.
     
  18. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    The things Trump did and campaigned on were all within the precedent of American politics and historically things the D Party supported.

    Trump campaigned on lower taxes, less immigration, tariffs/trade protectionism, ending wars, etc. You can disagree with his policy. I disagree with several of the ones I listed but they are all American.

    Biden campaigned, though he lied about several of them, on packing the court, taking away gun rights, increasing/federalizing unconstitutional lockdown orders (he hasn't done this yet), pushing through irrational levels of transgender support, criminalizing the oil and gas industry, taking away state election laws and federalizing them, and controlling more of the economy through various means.

    That's all unAmerican and you voted for it. If you don't agree, then we don't agree on what America is and we should split it up and redistribute the people

    I voted basically for a 90s' style Democrat in Trump.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    A. Trump drastically lowered taxes on the rich and on corporations. If we would go back to 2016 levels of taxation things would go a long way in the right direction.
    B. Biden was (and still is) against court packing. That tainted your response.
    C. Also, the right is trying to take away the right of people to vote and have their vote counted. Democracy is falling out of favor for fascism. If not for one faithful guy in Michigan this year they would have been closer to turning over an election that was obviously won properly in Michigan by about 150,000 votes

    Personally, I'd like to see a federalizing of districting throughout the country.
     
    • WTF? WTF? x 1
    • poop poop x 1
  20. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada Winebibber

    Biden is too demented to know what he is for or against.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  21. HornHuskerDad

    HornHuskerDad 5,000+ Posts

    OUBubba, I'll address each of your points.
    A. Income taxes under President Trump were lower for all groups. And reducing the corporate tax rate certainly has a positive impact on earnings, and thus on stock prices and values - a great plus for investors. And I disagree that raising taxes to the 2016 level is the right thing to do - it would just fuel the wish list of the far left for more spending/giveaway programs.
    B. Biden has said he's against court packing, true. And he's appointed a 36-member commission to study packing. It looks like he's paying lip service to the far left - there's no way a 36-member group can agree on anything. And even if it were proposed, it would only take one sensible Democrat (I know - that's asking a lot!) in the Senate to kill it. Some Democratic senator in a red state would look at the impact of his vote on his chances for reelection.
    C. We are not in favor of taking away the vote. I simply want to see that all those legally entitled to vote - and only those legally entitled to vote - get to vote once in each election. I don't see that it's an imposition on voting rights for a potential voter to verify that he is entitled to vote. You can't get on an airplane without a photo ID - why should it not be the same for voting.

    And for you last point regarding federal control of districting - read the Constitution. This is the United States of America - and the states have some rights reserved to them.
    And it's not a democracy, it's a republic. In a democracy, 51 wolves and 49 sheep voting on what to serve for lunch has a predictable outcome - and it's not good for the sheep.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  22. mb227

    mb227 2,500+ Posts

    Option two would sort of be an impossibility...one cannot kill a dead person a second time, not even if they refuse to comply with a lawful order.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  23. huisache

    huisache 2,500+ Posts

    court packing sounds like sound policy to me; I also favor allowing NFL teams to field 15 players if they feel like it. Or if it will help them win.

    And raising taxes on corporations will accomplish two things; ONE, we will be number one on high taxes on corporations and TWO, it will encourage the corporations to move more of their new facilities and hires to foreign climes where the tax rates are lower.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  24. 2003TexasGrad

    2003TexasGrad 10,000,000+ Posts

    Jerry Nadler is a pathetic sack of lard.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  25. theiioftx

    theiioftx Sponsor Deputy

    That’s offensive to lard.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  26. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    I'd be ok with 2016 tax rates if we went back to 2016 spending levels. Pretty much no chance of that ever happening.
     
  27. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    HHD
    Do you think when people post stupid stuff like Trump drastically lowered taxes for rich and corps they think anyone will believe the lies? Or that the voting laws in Ga will prevent legal people from voting?
     
  28. iatrogenic

    iatrogenic 2,500+ Posts

    Trump lowering taxes did not result in lower tax revenues. The revenues went up like they always do. The top 1% of earners pay 38% of the taxes, while receiving only 20% of the income. The bottom 50% of earners pay 2.9% of the taxes.
    Democrats think that if they raise taxes, tax receipts will increase. That never happens. Tax receipts have averaged 19.5% of GDP since 1946 regardless of the highest marginal tax rate being 28% or 91%. The receipts are influenced by economic crashes, like in 2009 when receipts dropped to 15% of GDP.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  29. horninchicago

    horninchicago 10,000+ Posts

    Democrat ideas and ideals are stupid.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  30. Duck Dodgers

    Duck Dodgers 1,000+ Posts

    The packing idea looks dead, not even plastic face Pelosi is going to bring it up.

    Still, what the leftist do is put out ideas that seem completely foolish at first, and slowly move the viewpoint of the Ruling Elite over to it, via their total control of the Media Entertainment complex.

    Dead for this time, but in another 4 years or so, who knows? Unless of course a Republican wins in 2024, then adding more seats will be a Mortal Threat to the Republic.
     

Share This Page