Well, since the candidates refuse to answer the question about court packing, maybe some of the democrats here can tell us what they think. I already know where Biden and Harris stand by virtue of being refusing to answer.
Pony Soldier wrote: I see my question for democrat posters here was ignored. perhaps nobody will admit to being a democrat...
Biden is NOT the one BTW... Kamala is the one. Why do you think Pelosi is dusting off the 25th amendment?
Really think so? I see a scenario where Dr. Jill keeps her husband upstairs to protect him from Covid-19 while she runs the nation. Harris is sent around the nation as the physical representation of the administration while Mrs. Biden actually runs things.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Pony Soldier wrote: Well, since the candidates refuse to answer the question about court packing, maybe some of the democrats here can tell us what they think. I already know where Biden and Harris stand by virtue of being refusing to answer.
The left leaners on this site will avoid that question like they would a coughing old man in a Safeway isle.
It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers−out of unorthodoxy
If all you're here to do is insult the other members on this board Rick, then you can restrict your comments to The Ring. The Courthouse is for discussing the issues, not each other
I believe I've already stated that I don't believe they should change the number of SC seats, and I'm not shocked that Biden eluded answering the question directly when asked during the debate, he answered in a way that his opponents didn't like and can't rebut. On the subject of "court-packing," it appears that Republicans are even more culpable.
This "one-up-manship" and partisanship of the judiciary needs to stop.
Court Packing? It’s Already Happening at the State Level In recent years, Republican-led legislatures have been adding state supreme court seats and working to change nominating rules, aiming to bolster conservative majorities.
Billy Corriher, Judicial Issues Writer | September 30, 2020
As President Trump and the Senate prepare to quickly fill the Supreme Court seat vacated by the death of liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with a conservative judge, Amy Coney Barrett, Democrats are discussing the possibility of "packing" the court, should November's voters give them control over the White House and both houses of Congress.
Some critics argue that adding seats to the court, in an effort to diminish or reverse its conservative majority, would mean abandoning a longstanding norm against court packing. In recent years at the state level, however, some Republican politicians have already abandoned such norms.
And it's not as if norms around picking federal judges haven't eroded at the federal level. Both Democrats and Republicans eliminated the Senate filibuster for certain judicial appointments, after complaining about obstructionism by senators from the other party. And in 2016 and 2017, the Republican-led Senate left a Supreme Court seat vacant for a year, refusing to hold a vote on President Barack Obama's nominee.
But norms have eroded even further at the state level.
Why do Republicans and nominee Barrett keep claiming qualifications on whether a candidate can be proposed in the final year of a President's term? Why does the Executive and Legislative branches being held by different political parties change anything than if they aren't? Aren't both elected by voters and equally valid? I'm quite sick of politicians taking the easy way out and not compromising for the better of us all. Or being hypocrites and completely flip-flopping when it suits their purpose, like McConnell and Graham.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
"
Why do Republicans and nominee Barrett keep claiming qualifications on whether a candidate can be proposed in the final year of a President's term? Why does the Executive and Legislative branches being held by different political parties change anything than if they aren't? Aren't both elected by voters and equally valid? I'm quite sick of politicians taking the easy way out and not compromising for the better of us all. Or being hypocrites and completely flip-flopping when it suits their purpose, like McConnell and Graham."
Excuse me, please provide your sourcing that Barrett made such claims.