SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

[Handyman]

Except we said the same things when Dubya and his cronies pulled the same crap with an added war or two Slap Shot. Hell we even had the extra proof of change with the Dems getting control of Congress in an effort to thwart him. Then we elected Obama and thought "Hey see, the people with brains have shown they support the people who do good!" and it took all of one year before that was proven completely wrong. Then it was a complete backslide because people forget and only pay attention to the stuff right in front of them.

Everything is going to be bad optics. No matter what. Spending is going be an issue, raising taxes is going to be, expanding Medicare, the Green New Deal, Voting Rights, adding states...hell if Biden doesnt say "God Bless You!" after a sneeze they will turn it into something about how he hates God. And the MSM will be party to it as well because they need the controversy for views and clicks. Well just like when your gf accuses you of cheating all the time when you dont...sooner or later you might as well earn the disdain. If everything we do is Socialism or Overreach or Judicial Activism anyways...

Kep is right...power is worthless if you dont use it. Our voters are fickle...the coalition is fleeting and if Biden tries to govern based on popularity of ideas then he wont last long. (and he will lose at least one house of Congress pretty quickly) The biggest complaint we have heard since I started watching politics in my youth was Dems are wishy washy and never believe in their ideas enough to actually do them when given the chance. They play by the rules and hope that will be enough. Well guess what, it never is. If Bill Belicheck wins Super Bowls by bending or breaking the rules and never gets punished for it, the other teams are committing malpractice not to do the same thing to even the playing field. Until such time as the GOP will go back to at least playing within the rules, it is time for the Dems to start acting like they actually want to win the game, not just do good enough and pat themselves on the back for moral victories.

Otherwise we are basically the NCAA watching as dozens of colleges commit the same crimes SMU did and not doing anything about it cause we feel bad we destroyed that program. Having the bazooka is not enough of a deterrent anymore.

 

[Slap Shot]

Except we said the same things when Dubya and his cronies pulled the same crap with an added war or two Slap Shot. Hell we even had the extra proof of change with the Dems getting control of Congress in an effort to thwart him. Then we elected Obama and thought "Hey see, the people with brains have shown they support the people who do good!" and it took all of one year before that was proven completely wrong. Then it was a complete backslide because people forget and only pay attention to the stuff right in front of them.

Everything is going to be bad optics. No matter what. Spending is going be an issue, raising taxes is going to be, expanding Medicare, the Green New Deal, Voting Rights, adding states...hell if Biden doesnt say "God Bless You!" after a sneeze they will turn it into something about how he hates God. And the MSM will be party to it as well because they need the controversy for views and clicks. Well just like when your gf accuses you of cheating all the time when you dont...sooner or later you might as well earn the disdain. If everything we do is Socialism or Overreach or Judicial Activism anyways...

Kep is right...power is worthless if you dont use it. Our voters are fickle...the coalition is fleeting and if Biden tries to govern based on popularity of ideas then he wont last long. (and he will lose at least one house of Congress pretty quickly) The biggest complaint we have heard since I started watching politics in my youth was Dems are wishy washy and never believe in their ideas enough to actually do them when given the chance. They play by the rules and hope that will be enough. Well guess what, it never is. If Bill Belicheck wins Super Bowls by bending or breaking the rules and never gets punished for it, the other teams are committing malpractice not to do the same thing to even the playing field. Until such time as the GOP will go back to at least playing within the rules, it is time for the Dems to start acting like they actually want to win the game, not just do good enough and pat themselves on the back for moral victories.

Otherwise we are basically the NCAA watching as dozens of colleges commit the same crimes SMU did and not doing anything about it cause we feel bad we destroyed that program. Having the bazooka is not enough of a deterrent anymore.

Yeah none of that negates my points especially this gem: Kep is right...power is worthless if you dont use it. Agree to disagree. And no not everything is bad optics or certainly there are levels of degree. Remain the adults in the room because the tide is turning. How many kids today are against gay rights, marriage etc. compared with 50 years ago? That is just one example.

Or just keep expanding the SC and going through the requisite fight to accomplish it every 4 or 8 years I guess, meanwhile ignoring solving issues by way of governance and legislature.

 

[Kepler]

Literally the only difference between our positions is I think court packing is f—king silly, and reform can be accomplished without adding justices.

But in that difference is everything, because without the Court every reform we try to do will be stopped. There is a reason FDR threatened to pack the Court. The Nazis will strike down all our legislation because they do not need a reason in the Constitution. They are there to do a job. They are nothing but politicians in robes.

And we have very little time, assuming we get a sweep in 2020. 2 years, minus the period in which Members and a third of the Senate will be campaigning in 2022. That means at most 20 months. The first month or so will be sorting out and staffing. So, 19 months. Less than 600 days. We need every day we can get to pass legislation into law without a Nazi tribunal sending it back.

That is worth the bad optics. Except it isn't even bad optics on balance because for every person potentially turned off by expanding the courts there will be two of our voters screaming at the administration if they don't do it for wasting this tiny opportunity to undo the damage of the last 4 / 20 / 40 years.

Our "revolution" is adding a few judges. Theirs was tens of trillions stolen from the middle class by the rich and hundreds of thousands of people, at the least, murdered by their callousness. I think we can take this moral hit and do what we need to, perfectly legally, to finally end the illness that Saint Ronnie began 40 years ago.

 

[SJHovey]

There are two reasons the Democratic leadership isn't going to go down the rabbit hole of court packing. First, it's stupid and goes nowhere. Once court packing becomes the norm, it becomes worthless.

Right now we have something called the National Labor Relations Board. This is a collection of five "judges" who issue rulings on labor type disputes, and they can have tremendous impact on the way we do business in this country.

The five judges are political appointees. There are usually three appointed by the current President and two from the opposite party.

Businesses and unions understand that if they get a bad ruling, just wait until the next time "their guy" is in office, they'll bring a similar case before the Board and get the opposite ruling. Thus, you have this situation where you are constantly flipping back and forth between different interpretations of what the rule is.

That's what you'd have with Court packing, which is not a good thing, and people like Biden and Pelosi understand that.

Second, they understand that the Supreme Court doesn't effect real change. Real change occurs in Congress, or much more likely, at the state or local level, then seeps up to Congress and the country as a whole. Once a foothold is gained, then and only then will the Supreme Court sort of put it's stamp of approval on it and make it the official law of the land.

When was the last time the Supreme Court effected real change that wasn't already building in the country? So, if that's the case, why waste political capital on fighting a court packing battle?

 

[psych]

But in that difference is everything, because without the Court every reform we try to do will be stopped. There is a reason FDR threatened to pack the Court. The Nazis will strike down all our legislation because they do not need a reason in the Constitution. They are there to do a job. They are nothing but politicians in robes.

And we have very little time, assuming we get a sweep in 2020. 2 years, minus the period in which Members and a third of the Senate will be campaigning in 2022. That means at most 20 months. The first month or so will be sorting out and staffing. So, 19 months. Less than 600 days. We need every day we can get to pass legislation into law without a Nazi tribunal sending it back.

That is worth the bad optics. Except it isn't even bad optics on balance because for every person potentially turned off by expanding the courts there will be two of our voters screaming at the administration if they don't do it for wasting this tiny opportunity to undo the damage of the last 4 / 20 / 40 years.

Our "revolution" is adding a few judges. Theirs was tens of trillions stolen from the middle class by the rich and hundreds of thousands of people, at the least, murdered by their callousness. I think we can take this moral hit and do what we need to, perfectly legally, to finally end the illness that Saint Ronnie began 40 years ago.

But FDR didn’t pack the courts. No one wanted him to. And what happened? A justice previously against the New Deal changed his mind.
Honest question, cause I like you and I think most of what you post is spot on, but did you even read the other ways to reform the court other than court packing? Hell, Vox posted an article about it today too. 9 ways to reform the court other than packing. If so, what do you find wrong with those ways that make court packing so superior to them?

 

[Slap Shot]

But in that difference is everything, because without the Court every reform we try to do will be stopped. There is a reason FDR threatened to pack the Court. .

He didn't pack them and we're 8 decades removed from FDR. Somehow we managed to get this far and aside from CU has the SC truly been a threat to our freedoms? Start by addressing the lobby industry not the SC.

 

[unofan]

But FDR didn’t pack the courts. No one wanted him to. And what happened? A justice previously against the New Deal changed his mind.

Because it was a credible threat. You can't bluff if the person doesn't believe you'll pull the trigger.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Because it was a credible threat. You can't bluff if the person doesn't believe you'll pull the trigger.

This.

 

[Handyman]

Because it was a credible threat. You can't bluff if the person doesn't believe you'll pull the trigger.

Oh jesus this is what I was trying to say and you nailed it. Threats only work if there is real fear they might actually happen.

And FFS can we stop calling it "court packing".

 

[Kepler]

But FDR didn’t pack the courts. No one wanted him to. And what happened? A justice previously against the New Deal changed his mind.
Honest question, cause I like you and I think most of what you post is spot on, but did you even read the other ways to reform the court other than court packing? Hell, Vox posted an article about it today too. 9 ways to reform the court other than packing. If so, what do you find wrong with those ways that make court packing so superior to them?

I will read them and comment. I like you, too. I just don't like the deeply-engrained Democratic incapacity to be bold. The Far Right captured the GOP and America by never, ever apologizing or compromising. Because of that they amplified their small voice many times over and had an impact well beyond their democratic representation.

And here we are, dwarfing them in size, unable to contemplate beginning to undo their damage even as they attempt to end democracy in America. Because why? Unseemly? Declassé?

At some point you start to think: (1) is this caution actually a deliberately set trap to prevent us from challenging our Plute overlords? (2) Is it possible that some (not you!) who claim to be the resistance are in fact benefitting so greatly from the present state of affairs that, while not working directly to sabotage us from the inside, they would not be too troubled if our efforts were fruitless and the status quo continued on?

The Princeton study showed we aren't a democracy any more. The way back from that is to exercise all our legal powers to the fullest. Because the rich will and does. The Right will and does. If you are trying to save someone from a burning building then compromise with the people cutting the fire hoses is not restraint or civility. It is, at best, dereliction. It's the governing equivalent of access journalism: don't ever challenge the slave masters or they might get angry with you. Now, if you're a slave that's absurd. But if you're only a passing person playing White Savior... well, let's not get too hasty. Those cotton contracts are important.

I think some of the inequality built into our system creates Reasons to not promote real change. And those Reasons become more compelling as one is... safer. That is, after all, how the German Nazis did it. The opposition never wanted to be too radical until one day they couldn't be anymore. I want to use our power -- if we get it -- while we have it, because the conservatives will be back and they will use their power. We've had 40 years to show us where that ratchet effect leads.

Pulling punches in a fight to the death is insane.

 

[unofan]

When was the last time the Supreme Court effected real change that wasn't already building in the country? So, if that's the case, why waste political capital on fighting a court packing battle?

Basically anytime they rule on a case involving corporate rights. Just in the last 20 years:
citizens united
Hobby Lobby
anything involving arbitration
McCutchen
Janus

Otherwise there's also
Heller
Shelby County
Anything else involving religion, but only as applied to Christianity.
Rucho (political gerrymandering is ok because the courts can't solve it - never mind that state courts apparently can)

 

[Handyman]

But FDR didn’t pack the courts. No one wanted him to. And what happened? A justice previously against the New Deal changed his mind.
Honest question, cause I like you and I think most of what you post is spot on, but did you even read the other ways to reform the court other than court packing? Hell, Vox posted an article about it today too. 9 ways to reform the court other than packing. If so, what do you find wrong with those ways that make court packing so superior to them?

I did...and no offense but they suck. The 5-5-5 plan is completely unworkable. The "lottery" would have worked if we were starting from scratch but now you are still risking political motivations and huge swing based on them. (what if 7 of the winners are Trump or Bush appointees...so much for any liberal legislation passing) The supermajority idea in theory is ok but all that will do is make it even more important to fill seats on the court as soon as possible. You think ACB is being rammed through...

The idea of insulating certain legislation is ridiculous and will never happen.

These ideas are fun academic talking points, but none of them could, would or really should be implemented in the current climate.

 

[Handyman]

Basically anytime they rule on a case involving corporate rights. Just in the last 20 years:
citizens united
Hobby Lobby
anything involving arbitration
McCutchen
Janus

Otherwise there's also
Heller
Shelby County
Anything else involving religion, but only as applied to Christianity.
Rucho (political gerrymandering is ok because the courts can't solve it - never mind that state courts apparently can)

Hey now...obviously it had been brewing that Voter's Rights no longer mattered because Racism was dead.

 

[Kepler]

Exactly. The right wing Court has moved against the popular will for the last generation on economic rights and voting rights. The social progress that gives conservative yahoos the vapors is a bone they throw to us after they gut the Voting Rights Act and enshrine the power of capital over human life.

This has been a conservative Court since the mid-70s. It is now poised to become an ultra-conservative Court. It is vastly out of step with American history and with the American people. It only exists because the anti-democratic EC gave farmland more votes than urban humans. It's the product of a rotten system even worse than the French before the Revolution.

And here's the thing: one way or another eventually people rise up and destroy oppressors. The American system when used correctly gives them a non-violent means to do it. It lets putzes like me campaign for the rights of the downtrodden. Take that away through tricks and bribery and someday you will be facing the downtrodden in a different way. They'll lynch me on the way to burning you and your family alive. So you may want to think about what happened in 1789.

I don't want that either, but it's either evolution or revolution. Either the rich lose their fifth home or everybody loses their McMansion.

 

[SJHovey]

Exactly. The right wing Court has moved against the popular will for the last generation on economic rights and voting rights. The social progress that gives conservative yahoos the vapors is a bone they throw to us after they gut the Voting Rights Act and enshrine the power of capital over human life.

This has been a conservative Court since the mid-70s. It is now poised to become an ultra-conservative Court. It is vastly out of step with American history and with the American people. It only exists because the anti-democratic EC gave farmland more votes than urban humans. It's the product of a rotten system even worse than the French before the Revolution.

And here's the thing: one way or another eventually people rise up and destroy oppressors. The American system when used correctly gives them a non-violent means to do it. It lets putzes like me campaign for the rights of the downtrodden. Take that away through tricks and bribery and someday you will be facing the downtrodden in a different way. They'll lynch me on the way to burning you and your family alive. So you may want to think about what happened in 1789.

I don't want that either, but it's either evolution or revolution. Either the rich lose their fifth home or everybody loses their McMansion.

Jeez, you'd think you guys would get tired of getting used.

Every time we have some nominated to the Supreme Court, the same old boogeyman is trotted out and you guys fall in line. Now they even have you lobbying to pack the court. For years you were told the boogeyman would be targeting young women seeking abortion. Now it's the voting rights act and ACA.

Every new conservative justice nominee is the one. This is the one that's going to do it. This is the one that's going to put us over the edge, into some sort of Mad Max style dystopia. This is the one!

I'm going to give you a score. 16-4.

By my count, if ACB is confirmed, 16 of the last 20 additions to the U.S. Supreme Court were appointed by conservative, Republican presidents. But each one of those 16 was the one!

C'mon, at some point you have to take a step back from the carnival barker, take a pass, and put that quarter back in your pocket, don't you?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Jeez, you'd think you guys would get tired of getting used.

Every time we have some nominated to the Supreme Court, the same old boogeyman is trotted out and you guys fall in line. Now they even have you lobbying to pack the court. For years you were told the boogeyman would be targeting young women seeking abortion. Now it's the voting rights act and ACA.

Every new conservative justice nominee is the one. This is the one that's going to do it. This is the one that's going to put us over the edge, into some sort of Mad Max style dystopia. This is the one!

I'm going to give you a score. 16-4.

By my count, if ACB is confirmed, 16 of the last 20 additions to the U.S. Supreme Court were appointed by conservative, Republican presidents. But each one of those 16 was the one!

C'mon, at some point you have to take a step back from the carnival barker, take a pass, and put that quarter back in your pocket, don't you?

545 kids were ripped from their parents forever. Our Courts. Our Systems. Our Government sat back and watched it happen. Stop pretending everything is just fine and nothing has changed.

 

[Bronco]

https://apnews.com/article/south-be...ota-virginia-a8bbabea9ee4d2fb13c6079c09f2f075

Clearly a nothingburger.

 

[jerphisch]

The D's just need to play it dirty like the R's would. Impeach Drunky McRapist and Oftrump for perjuring themselves to congress and fill the two vacancies. Problem solved. Surely the party of law and order can't complain about enforcing laws.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

The D's just need to play it dirty like the R's would. Impeach Drunky McRapist and Oftrump for perjuring themselves to congress and fill the two vacancies. Problem solved. Surely the party of law and order can't complain about enforcing laws.

I like this option.

 

[Handyman]

https://apnews.com/article/south-be...ota-virginia-a8bbabea9ee4d2fb13c6079c09f2f075

Clearly a nothingburger.

I am sure she will move towards the center as she spends time on the bench.

jerpisch,

That is a twisted way to solve the problem I love it