DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Senate Dems deliver stunning warning to Supreme Court: ‘Heal’ or face restructuring

Senate Dems deliver stunning warning to Supreme Court: ‘Heal’ or face restructuring

Several high-profile Senate Democrats warned the Supreme Court in pointed terms this week that it could face a fundamental restructuring if justices do not take steps to "heal" the court in the near future.

The ominous and unusual warning was delivered as part of a brief filed Monday in a case related to a New York City gun law. Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., referenced rulings by the court's conservative majority in claiming it is suffering from some sort of affliction which must be remedied.

"The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it," the brief said. "Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be 'restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.'"

The last part was quoting language from a Quinnipiac University poll, in which 51 percent favored such restructuring. In the same poll, 55 percent believed the Supreme Court was "motivated by politics" more than by the law.

Dramatic changes to the Supreme Court have been proposed by several Democrats vying for their party's 2020 presidential nomination, with "court-packing" being a common -- though highly controversial -- suggestion. Increasing the number of justices on the court would allow the president to shift the balance on the bench by loading up justices of his or her preference.

Democratic candidates, including former Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas, and Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Kamala Harris of California, and Gillibrand, all have signaled an openness to expanding the number of judges on the court should they reach the White House.

South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg has also supported expanding the court, proposing a plan to have some justices appointed by the president and others selected by the other justices in order to "depoliticize" the court. He's admitted that the only way he can think of to make this work would be to increase the size of the court from nine justices to 15, while stressing that simply "adding more justices onto the court who agree with you" would be a bad idea.

Yet other candidates such as former Vice President Joe Biden have come out against court-packing, as has Bernie Sanders, though the Vermont senator has suggested rotating judges to other courts.

Liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has also spoken out against court-packing, telling NPR in July, "Nine seems to be a good number."

The Democratic senators' brief was filed in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. City of New York, which dealt with legal limitations on where gun owners could transport their licensed, locked, and unloaded firearms. They are urging the court to stay out of the case brought by the NRA-backed group, claiming that because the city recently changed the law to ease restrictions, the push to the Supreme Court is part of an "industrial-strength influence campaign" to get the conservative majority to rule in favor of gun owners.

If the court still decides to hear the case, a ruling against New York City could prevent other cities and states from passing similar gun control laws.

Conservatives currently outnumber liberals on the Supreme Court 5-4, but the past year featured a multitude of cases where conservatives -- including President Trump's picks Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh -- sided with the liberal bloc.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senate-...e-restructuring

Hmmmmmmmm.

its a bit out there...but not really.

we've had 10 before, and it was actually up to congress to set the amount of justices.

its been 7 before, way back in the day. congress actually set it to 7 to keep andrew johnson from nominating anyone since he was about to get impeached.

so there's nothing unconstitutional about congress trying to raise or lower the amount of SC seats.

So, make the rulings we want, or we'll change the court. Nice to see the dems don't believe in an independent judicial system.

Look at the appointments over the past 30 years. Nobody does.

Sounds familiar to the "Pick the President we want or we will destroy the Country" agenda.

Losers moving the goalposts again.

RGB has already said this is a bad idea, and I agree. This is only a way to actually politicize the SC even further, so that the dems can have seats to appoint if they win in 20. Its rather childish, and for a group that calls the current president a petulant child - this is something he would have done, TBH.

For the group that says Trump is destroying the fabric of the country, sounds like a lot of you are eager to rip into that fabric yourself. JMO

I'm not sure how many you think constitutes "a lot". I don't see some ground swell of support for this on the board.

Your as bad as the Moron you support

I put the odds of the United States seeing the year 2100 at 50/50.

Sure, let's change the constitution, bill of rights, seperation of power.

By the way, I gotta say:



You shouldn't call someone a moron with a typo.

You're as bad as the moron you purport.

You don't read a lot of Diam's posts do you?

I agree that the court has become way more political than it was ever supposed to be but I do not believe it has gone off the rails..

I just find the dems points on this hilarious..

- The court has become too political (re. they don't side with us enough)
- If this doesn't change we must restructure the court
- In restructuring we will add justices
- Those justices need to be liberal leaning to side with us more often.
- This will make the court less political

I mean, c'mon guys, at least TRY to be a little less hypocritical.. this is like the spending budget issue, neither side actually wants to cut spending, they just hate when they are not in control of where that spending goes, so they whine about it.

Dems are on record as wanting to expand the court.. in the event that DT is re-elected, he should (if he was smart) make it a first priority to try to do that. (Not because I think it's a good idea or I want a couple more "conservative" judges but because it would be a good political move)

I would not like to see Trump expand the court even though it would stick it to the Dems for trying to game the system.

I am with Ruthy on this one, 9 is enough.

Oh I don't want to see him do it either.. I just want to see him propose it so the dems have to stand against it.. thus allowing him to say, "But 2 years ago you were all for it, what happened?"

I think you may wish to look just a little deeper at what at least some of them are proposing and why. Maybe, just maybe the intention is to help take politics OUT of the SCOTUS.

Ok, now I like your proposal!

You are my friend.

Just because they disagree with the rulings, it is a sick court?


LOL


You really are clueless. A nice guy who I have known a long time, but seriously.

Stacking a court is a stupid idea, but then you probably can't understand that.


Nine is a perfect number, and has been that for most of the history. Heck, even Ruth says it needs to stay at 9.


Ask yourself this, when was the last time a left leaning justice sided with the right? Chief Justice Roberts has sided with the left several times. He is trying to be the healer. The left needs to find a healer.

That's all easy to say and feel good about when your side stole a justice spot to stack the SCOTUS in favor of GOPers.

Democrat thinking seems, anyone who doesn't fall in lock step with what the democrats say, shouldn't have freedom or a voice.

People need to wake up, don't make a false idol out of a way of thinking or flawed human intuition.

You mean like Christian conservative Trump supporters?

Is this your first attempt at admitting that there isn't much of a difference? If so, I applaud you.

Nope. This is an obvious projection of Trumpian mentality onto dems: "People need to wake up, don't make a false idol out of a way of thinking or flawed human intuition."

The dems trying to game the system? So? The GOP was successful at that same game. But that’s when the GOP sheep get pissed. When the dems try to play their game. Me thinks Pelosi is weak these days. Dems need to attack back on all issues hard in the paint right now. But their too soft on the deplorables. Meanwhile trump’s dictatorship will grow and strengthen. SMH

Dictatorship? SMH....

In the White House, yes.