esmith
Veteran Member
Seems that some of the Dem's presidential hopefuls are warming to the idea of expanding the Supreme Court.
2020 Dems warm to expanding Supreme Court
2020 Dems warm to expanding Supreme Court
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
In the past it was done as an attempt to pack the court with one's chosen judges. The problem is that one could expand the court every time a new regime took over.Seems that some of the Dem's presidential hopefuls are warming to the idea of expanding the Supreme Court.
2020 Dems warm to expanding Supreme Court
Given that thought would you have a problem if a vacancy happened on the Supreme Court in 2020 and President Trump nominated a candidate to fill that vacancy and the Senate approved that nomination?Perhaps they should instead fight to make it not possible to deny a judge's hearings as the Republicans did.
The system is supposed to be a logical interpretation of the constitution and yet we have results that border on 50-50 votes. That doesn't suggest to me that the number of votes is the problem. It suggests to me that the constitution is not detailed enough.
It needs to go both ways, so yes. If Trump made such a nomination that should have a fair hearing as well. There is no "it is my turn to get back at you first".Given that thought would you have a problem if a vacancy happened on the Supreme Court in 2020 and President Trump nominated a candidate to fill that vacancy and the Senate approved that nomination?
I do not see one, no.Is there a substantial, non-partisan reason to expand the Supreme Court?
I think it's clever of the Democrats and I like it.Seems that some of the Dem's presidential hopefuls are warming to the idea of expanding the Supreme Court.
2020 Dems warm to expanding Supreme Court
Leave it at 9, then no ties.Just to throw a monkey wrench into the system. Add one more judge. No ties allowed. If a decision comes out 5 to 5 the judges would have to go back and deliberate again.
No ties in my messed up system either. People are always complaining about 5-4 decisions. It appears that one man may have made the decision to them. I seriously do not think that it would happen, just throwing it out there for discussion.Leave it at 9, then no ties.
Uh, how about the current Chief Justice, seems that he was appointed by a Republican and if my memory serves me correctly he hasn't exactly "walked party lines".The issue is that nothing we are discussing addresses the primary problem. Supreme Court Justices should be unbiased judges in the determination of case outcomes. More recently, however, one can begin to argue that this is no longer the case. Appointments are carried out by selecting someone who walks party lines in an effort to further future legislation. This should not be the case.
Given that thought would you have a problem if a vacancy happened on the Supreme Court in 2020 and President Trump nominated a candidate to fill that vacancy and the Senate approved that nomination?