SCOTUS: A Future Battle

All the noise around the newest attempt to pack the court with conservs to lead the fight on rights looks certain to move forward……(but the GOP is not packing the courts)…..

Then there has been noise about a Biden attempt to make the Supreme Court more in-line with typical America (whatever that is)……

Biden has said what Dems always say…..he will appoint a commission to study reform…..that means that they will drag their feet and accomplish NOTHING….as usual.

In an interview airing Sunday on “60 Minutes,” Biden told O’Donnell that if elected he would put together a bipartisan group to provide recommendations within 180 days on how his administration should work to reform the U.S. court system.

“If elected, what I will do is I’ll put together a national commission of, a bipartisan commission of scholars, constitutional scholars, Democrats, Republicans, liberal, conservative. And I will … ask them to over 180 days come back to me with recommendations as to how to reform the court system because it’s getting out of whack … the way in which it’s being handled,”

(thehill.com)

The House Dems have offered up a bill that I covered recently…..https://lobotero.com/2020/09/28/to-make-scotus-better/

Looks like law experts have jumped on the Dems bandwagon…..

Over two dozen constitutional law experts on Friday endorsed legislation recently introduced by a trio of House Democrats that would establish 18-year term limits for U.S. Supreme Court justices.

The endorsement letter (pdf) signed by professors and scholars across the country, along with a former U.S. senator and a former chief justice of the Utah Supreme Court, comes as the Senate GOP is trying to confirm right-wing Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Donald Trump’s third nominee to the high court, before the November general election.

The ongoing political battle over the Supreme Court vacancy that resulted from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death has elevated discussions and proposals to reform the high court. The term limits bill (pdf) was unveiled last month by Reps. Khanna (D-Calif.), Don Beyer (D-Va.), and Joe Kennedy III (D-Mass.).

“We can’t face a national crisis every time a vacancy occurs on the Supreme Court,” Khanna said while announcing the Supreme Court Term Limits and Regular Appointments Act (H.R. 8424), which would allow presidents to nominate two new appointees per four-year term.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/10/23/constitutional-law-experts-endorse-democrats-bill-create-18-year-term-limits-supreme

I like this proposal.

I do not think that partisan agents like Federalist Society should be consulted on judge nominations……NO political partisan group should have anything to say on nominations other than op-eds in support or opposition.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read I Write You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

14 thoughts on “SCOTUS: A Future Battle

  1. Don’t you think that if (the big “if”) the Democrats win the Senate, expand their hold on the House, and have Biden in the White House, they will have a run for the first two years, knowing the wheels of fortune can cost them either or both the House and Senate in 2022? All the big changes – change the tax laws to make everyone over $400,000 pay significantly more in taxes; set the ACA in more concrete to make it harder for the Republicans to commit suicide by ending it; expand and pack the Supreme Court; have a mandatory retirement age for Supreme Court justices (but not for the ossified old coots and old cootettes in the Senate and House, of course!); free college paid for by the taxes stripped off the hyper-wealthy; whatever else they can come up with, including, hopefully, infrastructure maintenance and expansion while interest rates are low; a doubling of the minimum wage…. Ye gods know the Republicans would never waste their time with helping their constituents have a better shot at the good life if it didn’t benefit the oligarchs first and more, and they will whine like pigs being eaten alive by bears about the profligate spending of the Democrats, hypocrites all!

  2. “should work to reform the U.S. court system.”

    In this case reform does not mean reform. It means change the rules so republican presidents cannot generate so many conservative judges to fill the vacancies.

  3. Reblogged this on It Is What It Is and commented:
    ON THIS I AGREE!! … “I do not think that partisan agents like Federalist Society should be consulted on judge nominations … NO political partisan group should have anything to say on nominations other than op-eds in support or opposition.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.