main
side
curve
  1. Welcome to the new boards! Details here!

Senate The Supreme Court

Discussion in 'Community' started by Ghost, Oct 9, 2011.

  1. Vaderize03

    Vaderize03 Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Oct 25, 1999
    So SCOTUS today agree to hear the Trump administration’s argument that the census should only count citizens and not undocumented immigrants. Oral arguments are scheduled for November 30th.

    Congress has a law on the books saying all persons must be counted, not just citizens, but something tells me the newly-minted conservative majority will develop amnesia where ‘judicial restraint’ and ‘deference to the legislature’ is concerned in regards to this (and potentially many other) issues.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2020
  2. blackmyron

    blackmyron Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 29, 2005
    So... catching up on my Supreme Court history, it appears that 'court packing' is screening any sort of actual hard look at the true history of the court - much like the Pledge of Allegiance, we're encouraged to believe, without evidence, that it existed from the beginning. Color me surprised to see the court actually fluctuating between five and ten justices over the course of the 19th century - including the pruning of Southern justices due to the Civil War, which means Barrett probably doesn't consider any Supreme Court decision from that time count.
    So, yeah - adding or subtracting justices is perfectly fine and in tune with the damn Constitution (and apologies if this was already covered and I missed it)
     
  3. dp4m

    dp4m Also a Narc star 10

    Registered:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Yeah, though again it hasn't really happened in the last 150 years. It was tried at the height of FDR's power and soundly rejected, but FDR dropped it once SCOTUS started giving him a couple of favorable rulings.

    Frankly, if I were court packing, in addition to looking at SCOTUS, I'd "add" Circuit Appeals Courts to break up states more.
     
  4. blackmyron

    blackmyron Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Oct 29, 2005
    The arguments against it will probably be based upon 'originalism' - which is why I think it's important.

    Also, conservatives already made their own arguments for it back when Scalia died - including Barrett, who was horrified by an ideological tilt in the Supreme Court.

    But, yeah, I realize that the damage is at all levels of judges - which is why McConnell has done nothing but confirm judges for the past 4 years.
     
  5. Vaderize03

    Vaderize03 Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Oct 25, 1999
    There hasn’t been an expansion of the Circuit Courts since Carter, so adding say, 250 new judgeships should Democrats win complete control wouldn’t necessarily be a purely political maneuver (although it would certainly be decried as one). Tampering with SCOTUS is harder, but if the conservative majority showed a penchant for selectively overturning clearly progressive legislation along ideological lines, support for it might exponentially grow.
     
    Rew, Juliet316 and blackmyron like this.
  6. I Are The Internets

    I Are The Internets Shelf of Shame Host star 9 VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Nov 20, 2012
    I really hope expanding the number of seats for SCOTUS happens in my lifetime.
     
    Vaderize03 likes this.
  7. KnightWriter

    KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus star 9 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Nov 6, 2001
    That expansion must be the reason Carter holds the record for the most judicial appointments in a single term, which gets overlooked because he didn’t appoint anyone to the Court.
     
  8. Jedi Knight Fett

    Jedi Knight Fett PT Interview Host/All-Around Good Guy star 10 VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2014
    Roosevelt even considered it but could not get the votes for it. It’s perfectly constitutional.
     
    Vaderize03 likes this.
  9. Vaderize03

    Vaderize03 Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Oct 25, 1999
    Ultimately he ended up not needed it as Justice Owen Roberts bowed to political pressure and began changing his votes.

    Not sure the conservative bloc would do the same in 2020. Roberts has strategically sided with the liberals at times, but a deeper dive into his reasoning often reveals the presence of legal Trojan Horses that could be used in future cases to advance conservatives ideals (see abortion restriction case from the most recent term). So it’s really up-in-the-air in many ways.
     
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2020
  10. vncredleader

    vncredleader Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Mar 28, 2016

    perfect succinct summary of how bs the "but scotus" argument is, and how the democrats have consistently and willfully allowed republicans to control the already inherently undemocratic and capitalist court. we dont need to pack or expand or even rotate the court, we need it gone. Also nice summary of how the dems could have halted ACB but chose not to despite not passing stimulus either making it wholly pointless
     
    heels1785 likes this.
  11. Jedi Knight Fett

    Jedi Knight Fett PT Interview Host/All-Around Good Guy star 10 VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2014
    Once Biden is in I hope Breyer leaves immediately unless he thinks the democrats are getting the senate in the midterms
     
  12. KnightWriter

    KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus star 9 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Nov 6, 2001
    Breyer isn’t going anywhere unless Democrats win at least one of the two Senate runoffs.
     
    Rogue1-and-a-half likes this.
  13. Jedi Knight Fett

    Jedi Knight Fett PT Interview Host/All-Around Good Guy star 10 VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2014
    Yea your probably right. We gotta hope they take it so they can at least appoint someone
     
  14. VadersLaMent

    VadersLaMent Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Justice Alito

    Wow. He claims they need to defend freedom of speech(for bigots). Well, if you proclaim your bigotry out loud do you get arrested? No. Freedom of speech is therefor maintained. Do you get labeled a bigot and potentially shunned by some part of society? Yep, and that is everyone else's freedom of speech to do so.
     
  15. Vaderize03

    Vaderize03 Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Oct 25, 1999
    Remember when RBG criticized Trump back in 2016 and conservatives practically disemboweled themselves over her supposed hypocrisy and bias and demanded that she step down?

    Seems they’ve developed a bit of dementia.
     
  16. Jedi Knight Fett

    Jedi Knight Fett PT Interview Host/All-Around Good Guy star 10 VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2014
    They have always been hypocrites. That’s literally their MO.
     
  17. A Chorus of Disapproval

    A Chorus of Disapproval TV Screaming Service / FFS! star 9 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    Aug 19, 2003
    You mean during the same time period when the Republicans refused to even hear of a nominee to be added to the court by a president because it was so close to an election...?
     
  18. anakinfansince1983

    anakinfansince1983 Nightsister of Four Realms star 10 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    Mar 4, 2011
    “Obergefell infringes on my rights to treat you as inferior and not be criticized for it because it says that you have the same rights as me!”

    You’re an ***hole and have always been an ***hole, Alito.

    And I just exercised my free speech by saying so.
     
  19. Jedi Knight Fett

    Jedi Knight Fett PT Interview Host/All-Around Good Guy star 10 VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2014
    No way they overturn gay marriage no matter how much Alito whines about it
     
  20. Vaderize03

    Vaderize03 Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Oct 25, 1999
    I don’t know, I think it’s possible. That being said, the backlash will be severe. Most of corporate America has made it clear that treating the LGBTQ community like second place citizens is a complete nonstarter in their workplaces and commercial establishments. It would still be deeply harmful, but probably a bit less destructive than say, if it were 20 years ago.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2020
    Juliet316 and Rew like this.
  21. Rogue1-and-a-half

    Rogue1-and-a-half Manager Emeritus who is writing his masterpiece star 8 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Nov 2, 2000
    It's hard for me to say that anything is impossible in today's climate. That includes overturning things like Obergefell & Roe. Once upon a time, you'd have said that was impossible. I won't say that now.
     
    Vaderize03 and Juliet316 like this.
  22. Darth Guy

    Darth Guy Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Aug 16, 2002
    The practical implications alone of overturning Obergefell seem like a bureaucratic nightmare (annulling potentially hundreds of thousands or millions of marriages?) and I think if the Supreme Court do something like that, we'll see their legitimacy start to be seriously threatened. They've already spent the past three decades since Casey undermining Roe-- abortion is effectively unobtainable in like 10 states already-- so I would expect them to continue their relatively subtle project. But who knows? Maybe the smarter John "Shoveling Money Toward Our Capitalist Overlords is More Important than Culture War Issues" Roberts will be unable to convince 1 of the other 5 to see things his way.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2020
  23. Yodaminch

    Yodaminch Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Mar 6, 2002
    If Biden's Justice Department was directed to recognize the ERA, would that bolster Obergefell?
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2020
    Vaderize03 likes this.
  24. Jedi Knight Fett

    Jedi Knight Fett PT Interview Host/All-Around Good Guy star 10 VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Feb 18, 2014
    Yes I would say so. At least in the eyes of people like Gorsuch. Although for all I know he isn’t on board with overturning gay marriage anyway
     
  25. dp4m

    dp4m Also a Narc star 10

    Registered:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Yeah, there's a difference between corporate social responsibility and corporate activism. I had pre-existing condition coverage for 10+ years before the ACA because my large corporation understood their bargaining power with insurance agencies. Same with same-sex domestic partner coverage and beneficiaries before Obergefell (again, like a decade).

    So, I'm sort of with Rogue -- I don't put anything past the Supreme Court.