CNN Reporting that RBG Has Passed

[Burgold]

5 minutes ago, RedskinsFan44 said:

Rest in Peace RBG ☹️

I wonder about the political calculus here. If Trump and Co ram through a new Justice (I expect them to) doesn't Trump lose a bit of motivation for his voters? The judges thing is pretty much a done deal.

They have until January. I don't think anything will stop them, certainly not a sense of honor or decorum.

That's what I think, too. 

I think there's a chance that McConnell holds off until the election, but if the election doesn't go through then he rams a nominee through during a dead duck session. The spin masters will glory in telling us how this is different from the Obama situation and how the voters' will had nothing to do with the Supreme Court if Biden wins. Mind you, if Biden wins, the Republicans are going to try to contest the election anyway and to install themselves as autocratic leaders. They're pretty close to doing away with the pretense that they believe in democracy anyway. Irony of ironies would be if they rammed their nominee through, Trump challenges the election, and then Trump's newly minted Justice breaks the tie to give him the presidency permanently.

[Springfield]

Well, let’s say Trump wins the election and Republican maintain control of the senate. Then they can do as they please pretty much.

 

It either Trump loses OR Democrats gain control of the senate then expect a bloodbath. Especially with a mixed result. Russia will be proud. We will continue our long descent.

[Burgold]

I could also see a scenario play out where McConnell and crew shout out that they don't need the usual vetting process because they've been preparing for RBG's death given her health. "We've done all the work. We don't even need hearings. Let's just move to the vote."

[TheGoodBits]

I don’t think they’ll hold hearings or vote before the election. I do think McConnell will try to jam it through in a lame duck session. I suspect he’ll be successful. 
 

If Dems take the senate they need to add at least 2 SCOTUS justices. There’s really no other option at this point. Republicans will probably try to do the same sometime in the future if they control Congress and the presidency, but that’s something we’ll deal with when we get there.
 

For now, we will have a significantly unbalanced branch of govt that isn’t representative of the American voting population and their beliefs. The *only* option is to go to extremes to rectify that situation. Otherwise everything in your legislative agenda will be for nothing. New voting rights act? Shot down. Strengthening unions? Shot down. Climate legislation that caps carbon emissions? Shot down. 

[DCranon21]

23 minutes ago, redskins59 said:

Let Republicans confirm their justice.  It would energize democrats. 

I say don't count on judges moving left( which could happen with Roberts and Gorsuch). Biden needs to  expand the supreme court. Don't say it loud right now. Don't want to energize the right!

 

I was just going to say this. If Biden wins, expand the whole judiciary branch. Fight fire with fire. Expand the SC to 11 justices and fill it with liberal justices. Expand the federal judges from 70 to 100. It's the only way you can fight the other judges Mitch pushed through. 

[nonniey]

1 hour ago, skinsfan_1215 said:

 

If Dems take the senate they need to add at least 2 SCOTUS justices. There’s really no other option at this point. Republicans will probably try to do the same sometime in the future if they control Congress and the presidency, but that’s something we’ll deal with when we get there.
. 

That would be the bottom of the slope. That would massively increase the power of the President. Every time there is a political shift from one party to the other the court would be increased (Heck I can see presidents increasing the court size even if it was his parties court and it blocks legislation important to him), until eventually there would no longer be political shifts in power.

1 hour ago, DCranon21 said:

 

I was just going to say this. If Biden wins, expand the whole judiciary branch. Fight fire with fire. Expand the SC to 11 justices and fill it with liberal justices. Expand the federal judges from 70 to 100. It's the only way you can fight the other judges Mitch pushed through. 

Amazing how many people support this idea as it would be the end of democracy. 

Edited September 19, 2020 by nonniey

[DCranon21]

7 minutes ago, nonniey said:

That would be the bottom of the slope. That would massively increase the power of the President. Every time there is a political shift from one party to the other the court would be increased (Heck I can see presidents increasing the court size even if it was his parties court and it blocks legislation important to him), until eventually there would no longer be political shifts in power.

Amazing how many people support this idea as it would be the end of democracy. 

 

I Disagree. It would not be the end of democracy. The courts in the country are fairly conservative as it is. A 6-3 ruling would end Civil Rights, LGBQT rights, as well as women's rights. Democracy as we see it right now is ending. It's about balance. 

[TradeTheBeal!]

Today is a great day to make a donation to Planned Parenthood and/or the ACLU.

[Forehead]

Interestingly enough, the number of justices has gone up and down in the past.  So the question is, can the positions only be eliminated when someone dies or retires, or can it be eliminated by decree?

 

Meaning say Dems were to add people to the court now, and there's tit for tat over the years and we're up to 31 justices, and at some point, cooler heads prevail and agree on both sides to reduce it back to nine.  Do they just pick 22 and tell them to retire, or do they have to wait for the justices themselves to make that decision?

[Hooper]

10 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said:

Wife and kids are asleep. I am literally sneaking out of my own ****ing house to participate in the RBG memorial. 

 

No, really. How were the wings at the strip club?

[Momma There Goes That Man]

If it ends up at 22 justices or 36 or whatever I’m fine with that. 9 makes any one person or nomination far too powerful. 

[No Excuses]

39 minutes ago, nonniey said:

That would be the bottom of the slope. That would massively increase the power of the President. Every time there is a political shift from one party to the other the court would be increased (Heck I can see presidents increasing the court size even if it was his parties court and it blocks legislation important to him), until eventually there would no longer be political shifts in power.

This is a far better system than waiting until someone dies. And when one party has openly lied about the norms and conventions required for appointing justices. 
 

“death of democracy” is peachy. There is currently a buffoon who spends every morning undermining the integrity of our voting system because he thinks he will lose. And he has an entire party backing him unconditionally on his march to eroding all civic norms and degrading every institution that checks his power. 
 

Go pound sand.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

40 minutes ago, nonniey said:

That would be the bottom of the slope. That would massively increase the power of the President. Every time there is a political shift from one party to the other the court would be increased (Heck I can see presidents increasing the court size even if it was his parties court and it blocks legislation important to him), until eventually there would no longer be political shifts in power.

Amazing how many people support this idea as it would be the end of democracy. 

the end of democracy is fast approaching and you’ve been there to cheer it on so not really interested in this.

 

This is an effort to stabilize this country with the democratic values upon which it was established. When this goes through, 5/9 scotus justices will have been made be Republican presidents  that didn’t win the majority of voters in this country. That’s democracy? The entire thing is out of alignment and needs correcting. 
 

also it would require the presidency and both chambers of Congress which, hopefully with the other things the Dems should theoretically pass, would make that pretty difficult to counter and wouldn’t just tit for tat every time the presidency shifted. 

[Fan since a Fetus]

.

Edited October 19, 2023 by Fan since a Fetus

[hail2skins]

Hol-lee........

 

 

[bearrock]

1 hour ago, nonniey said:

That would be the bottom of the slope. That would massively increase the power of the President. Every time there is a political shift from one party to the other the court would be increased (Heck I can see presidents increasing the court size even if it was his parties court and it blocks legislation important to him), until eventually there would no longer be political shifts in power.

 

Amazing how many people support this idea as it would be the end of democracy. 

 

We're left with some terrible choices.  I support doing away with the legislative filibuster, increasing the number of SCOTUS justices to increase SCOTUS caseload and decrease the political hullabaloo associated with every vacancy.  Ideally, we should have 15-25 justices deciding cases on panel assignments with en banc procedure.

 

Doing it under thses circumstances, however, is terrible.  You can bet that nothing will be off the limits going forward.  How long until a party controlling just one chamber of Congress or the White House threatens government shut down over a judiciary fight?

 

Yet the option of doing nothing is terrible too.  It will further reward Congressional calculations that is geared towards ends justifying the means.  McConnell and Reid will go down in history as a pair of disastrous Senate Maj Leaders that further drove an institution that was veering towards hyper partisan gridlock completely into the ditch.

 

Best thing would be a handful of GOP senators defecting to maintain consistency between 2016 and 2020.  Or I hope there will be another gang of "x" senators who agree to oppose any nomination before the next inauguration but in turn agrees to some fundamental reform in regards to the judiciary and the nominating/confirmation process that extricates the judiciary from the political arena.

[No Excuses]

18 minutes ago, Fan since a Fetus said:

My wife made a donation of $100 to get Mitch out of office last night. She is really bothered by this as I am. After talking about it this morning, we are donating $400 more. Her passing has lit a fire under our butts that should have already been there. We are on a mission the next several weeks and a real possibility that we go way beyond.

I emptied my wallet to every Senate candidate in a competitive race. The only play here is that McConnell can take the short term win and if the GOP loses the Senate and WH, all of those wins are nullified AND we get four new Senators from DC and Puerto Rico.

[Fergasun]

It would be better if the Senate un-does the nuclear option.  The question would be if the other party can restrain their political power if they get a majority. 

 

GOP act like "nanannana... Reid did it first, this is what Reid did."  

 

Also if the President has so much power they should be elected by a straight popular vote.  Bush got some SC Justices and Trump will have 3 without the popular vote.  How is that "representative". 

 

The Senate needs to be a politically moderating force in the country as it was intended.  A place where compromise is necessary to move the country forward.

 

The current political state in this country is disgusting... the fact that very few GOPers oppose Trump when he is clearly a vile, disgusting human being.  The fact that very few of them would admit Obama is a more than decent human being.  I am sure folks might trace it back to Bush and Clinton or say "it's always been that way..."  it hasn't.  Maybe its just the powers behind all the politics. 

 

 

 

@bearrock

I can't believe we were posting just about the same thoughts within minutes -- cheers!

[PleaseBlitz]

All the GOP has to do is follow it’s own rule that it made up 4 years ago.  If not, then **** rules, if the Dems win the Senate, do whatever needs to be done. 

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

Yeah, it’s a little disingenuous to sit idly by and be fine with the GOP blocking every judicial nominee they possibly could while Obama was president and then sound the alarm blaming the Democrats for destroying democracy if they decide to addTwo justices to the Supreme Court.

[DCranon21]

For Dems, the time for decency is over. You have to get nasty and sling mud. You have to make her death political. If they ram this justice through, make them pay. Generations are on the line. 

[Momma There Goes That Man]

 

[DCranon21]

Hopefully they follow through. 
 

 

[Fan since a Fetus]

2 hours ago, No Excuses said:

I emptied my wallet to every Senate candidate in a competitive race. The only play here is that McConnell can take the short term win and if the GOP loses the Senate and WH, all of those wins are nullified AND we get four new Senators from DC and Puerto Rico.

 

it's called Get Mitch or Die Trying and is run by crooked media.  https://secure.actblue.com/donate/getmitch

 

The donations are split between 13 candidates that are in opposition to the likes of Mitch and Collins. I wanted to go donate to each party individually, but my wife is all in with crooked media and I trust that she has done research and made an informed decision.

 

They've raised millions in the last 24 hours, not exactly sure how much. They've raised somewhere around 2.5 million since 9 a.m. this morning.

 

 

 

Edited September 19, 2020 by Fan since a Fetus

[PleaseBlitz]