Left wants to pack the Supreme Court

  • Thread starter Thread starter YHWH_Christ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.

David Bossie: Biden wants to pack Supreme Court to put America on road to socialism — he just won’t admit it​

Biden follows the lead of socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez​

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

By David N. Bossie | Fox News

Cruz rails against Dems over court packing​

Sen. Ted Cruz speaks out against the idea of increasing the size of the Supreme Court.

It has become abundantly clear — despite former Vice President’s Joe Biden’s repeated refusals to give an honest answer — that he’s planning to expand the size of the Supreme Court to add liberal justices if he’s elected president. He knows his radical agenda can’t become reality any other way.

Following in the footsteps of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Biden knows that many of the far-left proposals he wants to become law if Democrats control both houses of Congress and the White House won’t pass constitutional muster. So like Roosevelt in 1937, Biden wants to pack the Supreme Court with justices who will support a radical restructuring of our nation — regardless of whether the restructuring is constitutional.

This is a dangerous step that even Democrats refused to support when Roosevelt tried it 83 years ago. But today’s Democrats — following the lead of democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and fellow socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , D-N.Y. — only care about remaking America into a socialist nation. . . .
Click to expand...
 
Cathoholic said:
Montrose. What do you think “Court-Packing” us?
Click to expand...
I know what it is. It’s taking action legally (via Congress) to have the Democrats have a majority on the Supreme Court, same as Trump has done but in a different legal way.
 
Last edited:
No it is not “the same”. (Your premise assumes your conclusion. This is fallacious argumentation.)

If you want to think that go ahead and redefine court-packing in your mind.

President Trump has not been “Court-Packing”.
 
Cathoholic said:
No it is not “the same”. (Your premise assumes your conclusion. This is fallacious argumentation.)

If you want to think that go ahead and redefine court-packing in your mind.

President Trump has not been “Court-Packing”.
Click to expand...
You are missing my point.

Trump has legally put the Republicans in a majority on the Supreme Court.

If the Democrats after the election have control of the House, Senate and White House they can pass a Bill to increase the number of judges on the Supreme court and nominate Democrat leaning judges to fill the new seats.
Are you saying that is not legal?

It is irrelevant if you want to use the term court-packing. That is just an emotional term. It does not change what I said above.
 
Last edited:
In other words, you are going to insist on
RE-DEFINING court-packing.
 
Cathoholic said:
In other words, you are going to insist on
RE-DEFINING court-packing.
Click to expand...
Emotional term again.

Let me repeat this part:

"If the Democrats after the election have control of the House, Senate and White House they can pass a Bill to increase the number of judges on the Supreme court and nominate Democrat leaning judges to fill the new seats."

Is that legal? It’s either yes or no.
 
Montrose said:
Is that legal? It’s either yes or no.
Click to expand...
It is legal, but generally seen as a power grab, and thus unpopular.

What is happening here is that as Ds saw Rs having more opportunities to appoint SC justices, some Ds started talking about “court-packing,” meaning just what you said, increasing the size of the court so as to have the opportunity to appoint more D-chosen justices.

However, now some Ds are trying to redefine what court-packing is by accusing Trump of having done so simply by doing his job of nominating SC justices as positions become open.

In so doing, they reduce the impact of their proposal (which turned out to be unpopular) and tar Trump.
 
Last edited:
Montrose said:
I am British and don’t live in the US but I am curious as to what all the fuss is about. Since Trump became President it has been his aim to have a majority of Republican judges on the Supreme Court so why should it be an issue if the democrats decide to do the same?
Click to expand...
Exactomundo
 
Montrose said:
You are missing my point.

Trump has legally put the Republicans in a majority on the Supreme Court.

If the Democrats after the election have control of the House, Senate and White House they can pass a Bill to increase the number of judges on the Supreme court and nominate Democrat leaning judges to fill the new seats.
Are you saying that is not legal?

It is irrelevant if you want to use the term court-packing. That is just an emotional term. It does not change what I said above.
Click to expand...
I have not missed the point.

Republicans want to court pack one way.
Democrats may want to court pack another way.
A rose by any other name is still a rose.
Montrose said:
With the Supreme Court issue the end result is the same and in both cases it is legal.
Click to expand...
End Game
 
Last edited:
RidgeSprinter said:
I have not missed the point.

Republicans want to court pack one way.
Democrats may want to court pack another way.
A rose by any other name is still a rose.
Click to expand...
You are commenting to the wrong poster. My comments which you have quoted were to Cathoholic, not you.
 
The fact he won’t comment on it actually doesn’t bother me. On the contrary, it makes a lot of sense given his position.

His tent is quite wide right now nabbing both Berniebros and anti-Trump conservatives. Either side can just decide to vote for the Green Party or the Libertarians. OF COURSE he going to dodge the question as long as he possibly can. He’s in a place where can’t say yes OR no without losing some votes.

If I had to bet on it, I don’t think he would. I really don’t. At least…not in the next four years. I think Biden realizes that people are voting for him because 1.) he’s not Trump and 2.) they want the next 4 years to be a bit…duller than the previous 4. Not for leftist extremism to reign supreme. It’s in his best interest to play the sensible centrist game at the moment.
 
RidgeSprinter said:
Republicans want to court pack one way.
Click to expand...
Court packing is what the Ds want to do: increasing the number of position on the SC and then filling them.

What the Rs “want” to do is simply to fill positions as they become open due to death or retirement of a judge.

Two totally different things, do we can’t use the same terms to describe both.
 
Montrose said:
Okay but you said to me you have not missed the point. I never said you missed the point. I said that to Cathoholic.
Anyway happy we are in agreement.
Click to expand...
Yes, I see it same as you.
End Game is same no matter how one Legally arrives at it.
 
Annie said:
Two totally different things, do we can’t use the same terms to describe both.
Click to expand...
The terms are irrelevant. In both scenarios the aim is to get either a majority republican judges or democrat judges, and both ways are legal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top