Amy Coney Barrett CONFIRMED to the U.S. Supreme Court

[Outlaw]

I fear congress pushing through a restructuring of the court on a strictly partisan vote, giving Americans a Supreme Court that looks unlike anything they grew up with, and unlike the institution we’ve had for more than 240 years will destroy the legitimacy of the court...
Turning it into a true extension of whoever controls the senate.
Rethugs could run on "setting things right" next cycle and really f*ck the country.

Rethugs already set the precedent and politicized the courts by stealing Obama’s court appointments

 

[Baka's Weird Case]

Agreed, but what evidence is there that the court is in need of reform? what series of decision in the last 4 years justifies this level of panic?
What decisions/dissents make you believe Roe, civil rights, or gay marriage are in jeopardy?

the court in the last 4 years has been 5-4 conservative. all major cases involving the ACA were 5-4, so having a 6-3 court would certainly jeapordize it. Obergefell was also 5-4 so that would be at risk, and alito and thomas recently said that it should be revisited.
this abortion restriction Louisiana put in place was only struck down 5-4. With Barrett on the Court it would have probably been upheld
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-1323_c07d.pdf
the following cases are from the Obama Admin. but because a 5-4 Court was still in place they are still relevant:
Shelby County v. Holder was a landmark case threatening voting rights from discrimination on the basis of race. 5-4 decision
Utah v. Strieff was 5-3 and threw the Fourth Amendment in the trash

 

[DEAD7]

Rethugs already set the precedent and politicized the courts by stealing Obama’s court appointments

Playing around nominations is one thing, restructuring the court itself is something else entirely. I dont expect anyone on the left to see a difference at this time whats gonna happen is gonna happen. Im voting for Biden so ill be complicit if it does happen.

 

[Outlaw]

Playing around nominations is one thing, restructuring the court itself is something else entirely. I dont expect anyone on the left to see a difference at this time whats gonna happen is gonna happen. Im voting for Biden so ill be complicit if it does happen.

What if the Dems move to add retroactive term limits of say 16 years so all justices who have served more than 16 years will be replaced by Biden

 

[DEAD7]

the court in the last 4 years has been 5-4 conservative. all major cases involving the ACA were 5-4, so having a 6-3 court would certainly jeapordize it. Obergefell was also 5-4 so that would be at risk, and alito and thomas recently said that it should be revisited.
this abortion restriction Louisiana put in place was only struck down 5-4. With Barrett on the Court it would have probably been upheld
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-1323_c07d.pdf
the following cases are from the Obama Admin. but because a 5-4 Court was still in place they are still relevant:
Shelby County v. Holder was a landmark case threatening voting rights from discrimination on the basis of race. 5-4 decision
Utah v. Strieff was 5-3 and threw the Fourth Amendment in the trash

...and you believe these decisions support the need for reform/restructuring of the SC?
We will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[DEAD7]

What if the Dems move to add retroactive term limits of say 16 years so all justices who have served more than 16 years will be replaced by Biden

but why tho?
What has happened that caused this tilt?

 

[Baka's Weird Case]

...and you believe these decisions support the need for reform/restructuring of the SC?
We will just have to agree to disagree.

i think the reason they should do it is because of republican conduct in this area.

republicans refused to seat a justice for a year under the pretext that the american people should get to decide in an election year. then they rammed one in in less than a month before an election because they had the power. their goal from all of this has transparently been to swing the court to the right wing and prevent the democratic party from being able to achieve and maintain political gains. the fact that SCOTUS issued a bunch of slim 5-4 majorities in support of crucial issues for the democratic party's voters like the ACA, abortion rights and gay marriage makes the prospect of a 6-3 conservative court extremely disturbing to any democratic politician or voter.

why should the democrats not add seats to the Supreme Court? its not against the constitution. it isn't any more a violation of norms than either holding a seat open for a year or ramming a judge through the month before the election (both of which were unprecedented - restructuring of SCOTUS is not). the democratic party has every interest to do this and, if they gain the Senate, no reason not to.

 

[Gus Money]

I fear congress pushing through a restructuring of the court on a strictly partisan vote, giving Americans a Supreme Court that looks unlike anything they grew up with, and unlike the institution we’ve had for more than 240 years will destroy the legitimacy of the court...
Turning it into a true extension of whoever controls the senate.
Rethugs could run on "setting things right" next cycle and really f*ck the country.

Says the guy always complaining about fear-mongering from the left.



There’s nothing special about the size of the court and the Constitution allows the Dems/Congress to do just that. Nobody cares how the Court looked when we were growing up, things change and people want to the court to be an actual democratic institution. Not some rightwing wet dream.

Republicans already run on that “setting things right” bullshyt every cycle before they proceed to just mess things up for the next democrats president. Not only are most of their actions strictly partisan, they’re unpopular with most Americans. It’s time for the Dems to finally play hardball for once and show some backbone.

 

[DEAD7]

i think the reason they should do it is because of republican conduct in this area.

republicans refused to seat a justice for a year under the pretext that the american people should get to decide in an election year. then they rammed one in in less than a month before an election because they had the power. their goal from all of this has transparently been to swing the court to the right wing and prevent the democratic party from being able to achieve and maintain political gains. the fact that SCOTUS issued a bunch of slim 5-4 majorities in support of crucial issues for the democratic party's voters like the ACA, abortion rights and gay marriage makes the prospect of a 6-3 conservative court extremely disturbing to any democratic politician or voter.

why should the democrats not add seats to the Supreme Court? its not against the constitution. it isn't any more a violation of norms than either holding a seat open for a year or ramming a judge through the month before the election (both of which were unprecedented - restructuring of SCOTUS is not). the democratic party has every interest to do this and, if they gain the Senate, no reason not to.

Restructure the SC to punish republican congressmen...
Alright.
I guess this is just the reality of todays politics...
...f*ck the other side is really all the justification one needs.

The SC has been fine IMOsucks its become a pawn in the senates game.

 

[Json]

Restructure the SC to punish republican congressmen...
Alright.
.

So smiley do you call f—king up the judiciary appointments instead of just passing the legislation in the legislative branch?

 

[Baka's Weird Case]

Restructure the SC to punish republican congressmen...
Alright.
I guess this is just the reality of todays politics...
...f*ck the other side is really all the justification one needs.

The SC has been fine IMOsucks its become a pawn in the senates game.

republicans stalled two years worth of obamas judicial appointments including one to the supreme court. that hadnt been done before and showed republicans value stacking the judicial system over filling empty seats so the judicial branch can function as its supposed to. and their only argument this whole time has been "fukk the other side"

fukk them. McConnell broke the system that had been working and politicized the judiciary. now it needs to be fixed.

 

[Gus Money]

Restructure the SC to punish republican congressmen...
Alright.
I guess this is just the reality of todays politics...
...f*ck the other side is really all the justification one needs.

The SC has been fine IMOsucks its become a pawn in the senates game.

The goal is to restructure the Court to make it a more democratic institution that represents the majority of citizens, something allowed under the Constitution, but you know that already. It’s fine with you as it is because you’re a conservative, but the Court has undergone plenty of ideological shifts over the years. It’s not some sacred monument.

You’ve got nobody to blame but your fellow conservatives; y'all stopped playing by the rules years ago. It’s about time the Dems stopped hoping republicans would honor this hallowed history that’s only important when the right loses their majority.

I oddly don’t remember you being this bothered when the GOP refused to even hold hearings for Merrick Garland. Or when they immediately went back on their word once they had the power. I’d love to hear why that’s different.

 

[Gus Money]

NPR Choice page

With just days until the election, some Senate Republicans are suggesting that when it comes to the Supreme Court, eight is enough. Eight justices, that is.

For the first time, some Senate Republicans are saying that if Hillary Clinton is elected, the GOP should prevent anyone she nominates from being confirmed to fill the current court vacancy, or any future vacancy.

The pronouncements are such a break with history and tradition that they often provoke the response, "Really?" Some see such statements as little more than an attempt to motivate the Republican base to get out and vote. Others, however, see the trend as a further deterioration of American institutions of government.

It’s almost like one side has been playing politics with the Supreme Court for quite some time.

 

[Baka's Weird Case]

NPR Choice page



It’s almost like one side has been playing politics with the Supreme Court for quite some time.

at the current rate we are gonna end up pretty quickly at a point where if one party controls the white house and one controls the senate they just wont confirm a justice

 

[DEAD7]

So smiley do you call f—king up the judiciary appointments instead of just passing the legislation in the legislative branch?

I dont understand the question

The goal is to restructure the Court to make it a more democratic institution that represents the majority of citizens, something allowed under the Constitution, but you know that already. It’s fine with you as it is because you’re a conservative, but the Court has undergone plenty of ideological shifts over the years. It’s not some sacred monument.

You’ve got nobody to blame but your fellow conservatives; y'all stopped playing by the rules years ago. It’s about time the Dems stopped hoping republicans would honor this hallowed history that’s only important when the right loses their majority.

I oddly don’t remember you being this bothered when the GOP refused to even hold hearings for Merrick Garland. Or when they immediately went back on their word once they had the power. I’d love to hear why that’s different.

The SC has been fine IMO(I'd even say its been good) and hasnt shown any signs of needing restructuring
Ill ask you as well, what series of recent SC decisions make you believe the institution is compromised or in need of reform?



Confirmations could use some tweaking to make it less political, but restructuring a functioning SC seem like partisan nonsense untethered from reality.