You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > US Supreme Court Ginsburg kicks the bucket
December 3 2020 7.45am

US Supreme Court Ginsburg kicks the bucket

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 9 of 9 First< 5 6 7 8 9

 

View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 28 Oct 20 7.33am Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Parroting Trump's silly epithet? Biden hasn't said he will pack the court! In fact he has spoken against the idea in the past as he knows very well it could easily rebound in the future.

What he has reserved his position and will consider what to do when he knows what is actually needed AND possible.

That something will be needed is obvious. Removing any suspicion of political influence from the highest court is essential. Changing the voting rules within the Senate back to requiring cross party support of candidates and setting term limits for justices may do it.

The Supreme Court has always been political it is nothing new. Obama wanted Ginsburg to step down so he could put his pick in her place in case the republicans got back in. Up until the 1950's the court was always socially conservative then it swung liberal and now maybe it's going back the other way.


Just because Trump gets his judge it doesn't mean they will vote the way he wants them to. Lots of judges once appointed for life and free from political pressure have surprised the public with their verdicts.

Earl Warren was a conservative republican politicain appointed to the Supreme Court by Eisenhower as he was thought to be "sound". Instead be became one of the most liberal judges and led the charge in championing civil rights.

The sensible thing for sleepy Joe to do is just appoint his judge next time there is a vacancy which is what all the other Presidents have done. Trump has been lucky that 3 of them have died during his presidency normally it's less than that.

As for structural reforms to the court I suspect that once it quietens down the democrats will leave well along.

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 28 Oct 20 8.57am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

The Supreme Court has always been political it is nothing new. Obama wanted Ginsburg to step down so he could put his pick in her place in case the republicans got back in. Up until the 1950's the court was always socially conservative then it swung liberal and now maybe it's going back the other way.


Just because Trump gets his judge it doesn't mean they will vote the way he wants them to. Lots of judges once appointed for life and free from political pressure have surprised the public with their verdicts.

Earl Warren was a conservative republican politicain appointed to the Supreme Court by Eisenhower as he was thought to be "sound". Instead be became one of the most liberal judges and led the charge in championing civil rights.

The sensible thing for sleepy Joe to do is just appoint his judge next time there is a vacancy which is what all the other Presidents have done. Trump has been lucky that 3 of them have died during his presidency normally it's less than that.

As for structural reforms to the court I suspect that once it quietens down the democrats will leave well along.

It is simply untrue that the US Supreme Court has always been political. Until a relatively short time ago Presidents nominated outstanding candidates irrespective of their perceived political leanings. It is only in recent years it has drifted this way. The big change was though when McConnell changed the rules which allowed a simple majority of Senators to move the process forward. In the past this had always been two-thirds and then three-fifths. It's this which has cemented the politicisment as McConnell openly says this is so they can throw out things like Obamacare and Roe v Wade.

So whilst the Judges may still be able to surprise when it's a bunch of motivated politicians selecting them for their own purposes the system isn't healthy.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 28 Oct 20 9.19am Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

It is simply untrue that the US Supreme Court has always been political. Until a relatively short time ago Presidents nominated outstanding candidates irrespective of their perceived political leanings. It is only in recent years it has drifted this way. The big change was though when McConnell changed the rules which allowed a simple majority of Senators to move the process forward. In the past this had always been two-thirds and then three-fifths. It's this which has cemented the politicisment as McConnell openly says this is so they can throw out things like Obamacare and Roe v Wade.

So whilst the Judges may still be able to surprise when it's a bunch of motivated politicians selecting them for their own purposes the system isn't healthy.

Up until the 1950s there was a consensus in Congress because the pro segregation Democrats didn't want a liberal judge that would rock the boat in the south. So they were fine with most Republican socially conservative nominations.

However the Supreme Court today simply reflects the divisions in the country as both parties move further apart from each other.

As for politicians electing judges I agree it is a lousy system but this is what the founding fathers wanted.

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 28 Oct 20 10.23am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

Up until the 1950s there was a consensus in Congress because the pro segregation Democrats didn't want a liberal judge that would rock the boat in the south. So they were fine with most Republican socially conservative nominations.

However the Supreme Court today simply reflects the divisions in the country as both parties move further apart from each other.

As for politicians electing judges I agree it is a lousy system but this is what the founding fathers wanted.

This idea that "what the founding fathers wanted" is the only thing that matters seems what is throttling common sense in the USA and holding them back. Those founding fathers were wise men who would not have claimed the ability to foresee the future or restrict the country from responding to it.

So I see it as an excuse and not a reason not to bring in changes which are needed.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 9 of 9 First< 5 6 7 8 9

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > US Supreme Court Ginsburg kicks the bucket