Biden says voters don't deserve to know his stance on packing Supreme Court

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,382]

54 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

only because alcohol affects our spelling.

I dont drinmk

[TBoneTX 46,116]

13 hours ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

I dont drinmk

Your keyboard fingers do, obviously man.

[Dashinka 24,789]

Gallup Poll: Voters Do Not Support Claims Of A “Packed” Supreme Court

 

We have been discussing the recent talking point emerging from the Biden campaign and Democratic leaders on court packing. While continuing to refuse to state their position on packing the Supreme Court to create an ideological majority, various Democratic figures have been calling the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett (and all of the Trump nominees) a form of court packing. A recent Gallup poll found only 32 percent of voters thought that the Supreme Court was dominated by conservatives.

This weekend, Sen. Chris Coons (D., Del.)  on Fox News Sunday said that the Barrett nomination “constitutes court packing.” Both Biden and his running mate Sen. Kamala Harris (D., Cal.) have also referred to nominating conservatives a court packing. Harris said in the debate that if you want “to talk about court packing . . . I have witnessed appointments for lifetime appointments to federal courts…People who are purely ideological, who have been reviewed and found to have been not competent, or substandard.”  Harris has previously said that she believes packing the Court is a worth considering.

The polls show that most Americans are against court packing. A recent Rasmussen poll found that 55 percent of Americans opposed any court packing plan and only 27 percent was in favor of the idea. The problem is that the Democratic base is more divided with some Democratic voters calling for extreme measures if the Democrats take over both Congress and the White House. Rather than irritate those voters, the Democrats are saying that voters will have to wait until after they elect Biden to know whether they are pack the Court.

 

https://jonathanturley.org/2020/10/13/gallup-poll-voters-do-not-support-claims-of-a-packed-supreme-court/

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

The entire purpose of Coons and Democrats comical "court packing" exaggerations of Trump filling an open seat and GOP Senators stalling Obama nominations (which was done extensively under Bush) is to gaslight the public. The pathetic moral equivalence bait is to either 1) Justify an unequivocally extreme act of court packing, and 2) Try and use this facade as negotiating leverage to stop filling vacancies, even though there's no actual leverage. If Democrats offered even remote sanity in their actions and platforms rather than this conspiracy theory promoting disinformation and abuse of power junk, Trump wouldn't even stand a chance.

[Dashinka 24,789]

Biden floats ‘bipartisan’ commission to help him pack the Supreme Court
 

Democratic nominee Joe Biden continues to signal his support for packing the Supreme Court.

The former vice president promises now that, if elected, he will convene a “bipartisan” panel to advise him on how to “reform” the court, which he says is “getting out of whack.” This weasely framing, the idea that the Supreme Court needs reforming, is an obvious tell that Biden absolutely intends to expand the court. He just does not want to say as much aloud, probably because court-packing polls poorly. 

"If elected,” Biden said in an interview with CBS News’s Norah O’Donnell, “what I will do is I'll put together a national commission of, bipartisan commission of, scholars, constitutional scholars, Democrats, Republicans, liberal, conservative.”

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/biden-floats-bipartisan-commission-to-help-him-pack-the-supreme-court

 

 

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

20 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Biden floats ‘bipartisan’ commission to help him pack the Supreme Court
 

Democratic nominee Joe Biden continues to signal his support for packing the Supreme Court.

The former vice president promises now that, if elected, he will convene a “bipartisan” panel to advise him on how to “reform” the court, which he says is “getting out of whack.” This weasely framing, the idea that the Supreme Court needs reforming, is an obvious tell that Biden absolutely intends to expand the court. He just does not want to say as much aloud, probably because court-packing polls poorly. 

"If elected,” Biden said in an interview with CBS News’s Norah O’Donnell, “what I will do is I'll put together a national commission of, bipartisan commission of, scholars, constitutional scholars, Democrats, Republicans, liberal, conservative.”

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/biden-floats-bipartisan-commission-to-help-him-pack-the-supreme-court

 

 

No question. Democrats began the politicization of the courts with Bork/Thomas nominations, and destroyed the deliberative nature of the Senate by killing filibusters. Now that they're on the losing end of the changes they made, they want to change the rules to benefit them again. There's no "bipartisan" aspect of it. Learn to win elections and deal with the consequences of your actions.

[Dashinka 24,789]

Jonathan Turley: Here are the worst proposals to reform Supreme Court

 

Michael Klarman of Harvard attacked the foundation of Congress before the Supreme Court. He condemned a "malapportionment" in the Senate which he believes gives Republicans greater power, and referred to their refusal to vote nominee Merrick Garland as "stealing a seat." While it was controversial, and I was among those calling for a vote on Garland, that decision was allowed under the Constitution. Yet Klarman clearly calls it court packing to justify any act of retaliation as he said, "Democrats are not initiating such a spiral. They are simply responding in kind."

Klarman said not to worry about Republicans responding with their own court packing scheme when they return to power. He insists Democrats can change the system so Republicans will "never win another election" without abandoning their values. He concedes that "the Supreme Court could strike down everything I just described" so it has to be packed in order to advance to allow such changes to occur. Here are some of the other wacky proposals out there to reform the Supreme Court.

Several academics argue for an alternative which moves in the opposite direction. If you cannot make the branch larger, then shrink its authority. By enacting what is known as jurisdiction stripping, Democrats can bar federal courts from reviewing certain types of legislation. Faced with a conservative bench, Democrats in control of Congress Would make the judiciary into a nullity to wield unchecked authority with various issues. Assuming courts would allow such a move, it then creates a race to the bottom as more legislation is protected from judicial review.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/jonathan-turley-here-are-the-worst-proposals-to-reform-supreme-court/ar-BB1alXp7