Red Mosquito

Usually he tweets about baseball and WWDTM so this is an odd day for him.

digster wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:Plowing right through is what these guys do best.

Republicans have to be aware that Democrats are going to be more eager to pack the court if they do plow it through.

Provided Democrats get the numbers they need (and the White House) in 2020, this would seem to me to be a near-certainty.

The danger with it is if they do it, Republicans will see the new justices as illegitimate as the Dems see Gorsuch and (potentially) Kavanaugh, and could retaliate with their own shenanigans to take back SCOTUS when they get back into power. Or states could go full Little Rock and just ignore the Court if they have the support of the White House.

If I were the Dems if they have the power in 2021, I would threaten court packing but agree to hold back if Republicans agree to work together to pass a constitutional amendment fixing the Court at nine members on one 18 year term, similar to what I described here. I'd even be willing to spot them Ginsburg and Breyer first by forcing current justices off by age instead of seniority, thus setting up the 2024 election as the prize on who gets to replace Thomas and Roberts.

Ah, if wishes were fishes.

Green Habit wrote:

digster wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:Plowing right through is what these guys do best.

Republicans have to be aware that Democrats are going to be more eager to pack the court if they do plow it through.

Provided Democrats get the numbers they need (and the White House) in 2020, this would seem to me to be a near-certainty.

The danger with it is if they do it, Republicans will see the new justices as illegitimate as the Dems see Gorsuch and (potentially) Kavanaugh, and could retaliate with their own shenanigans to take back SCOTUS when they get back into power. Or states could go full Little Rock and just ignore the Court if they have the support of the White House.

I mean, I don't disagree that in the long term it would be a healthy thing for the Court or the country, it's not a value judgment per se; I just think that ship has sailed. Republicans viewed the last potential justice as illegitimate solely on who nominated him, or they didn't let an adherence to norms overwhelm their political judgment; why would anyone expect that to change? Should Democrats regain control in 2020 and pack the court, Republicans will wail about the norms, but who's going to take that seriously? Again, I would agree that it would be another indication of a country on a downhill slope, but I really think that is already underway. The Democrats' argument in 2020 will be simple; you stole a Supreme Court seat so we're fixing that mistake.

The other question is just exactly how far to the right that five justice wing of SCOTUS will go. They're not dummies, they know that if the Court gets packed their power goes away. John Roberts, for one, may have got cold feet about fully striking down the ACA due to fear of risking the Court's legitimacy, just like another Justice Roberts (Owen) did when FDR threatened to pack the Court. It will be a delicate balance for them to find the parts of law they can get away with altering without causing massive public backlash.

Like I said: the invention of chili cheese fries was our warning of societal decay, and we didn't listen.

This is where we were always headed, and it's too late to turn back now.

BurtReynolds wrote:Like I said: the invention of chili cheese fries was our warning of societal decay, and we didn't listen.

This is where we were always headed, and it's too late to turn back now.

What in gods name do you have against chili cheese fries??

Strat wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:Like I said: the invention of chili cheese fries was our warning of societal decay, and we didn't listen.

This is where we were always headed, and it's too late to turn back now.

What in gods name do you have against chili cheese fries??

They are a harbinger of our doom.

Green Habit wrote:The other question is just exactly how far to the right that five justice wing of SCOTUS will go. They're not dummies, they know that if the Court gets packed their power goes away. John Roberts, for one, may have got cold feet about fully striking down the ACA due to fear of risking the Court's legitimacy, just like another Justice Roberts (Owen) did when FDR threatened to pack the Court. It will be a delicate balance for them to find the parts of law they can get away with altering without causing massive public backlash.

Yeah I agree that that could happen in the long run (particularly as a Conservative court faces an increasingly liberalizing general population), I just don't think Democrats will ever expect or trust the Court to moderate or shift into a theoretical position that may have been in place with Garland in there.

BurtReynolds wrote:

Strat wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:Like I said: the invention of chili cheese fries was our warning of societal decay, and we didn't listen.

This is where we were always headed, and it's too late to turn back now.

What in gods name do you have against chili cheese fries??

They are a *harbinger of our doom.

*hambinger

Chris_H_2 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

Strat wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:Like I said: the invention of chili cheese fries was our warning of societal decay, and we didn't listen.

This is where we were always headed, and it's too late to turn back now.

What in gods name do you have against chili cheese fries??

They are a *harbinger of our doom.

*hambinger

*hambringer

digster wrote:

Green Habit wrote:The other question is just exactly how far to the right that five justice wing of SCOTUS will go. They're not dummies, they know that if the Court gets packed their power goes away. John Roberts, for one, may have got cold feet about fully striking down the ACA due to fear of risking the Court's legitimacy, just like another Justice Roberts (Owen) did when FDR threatened to pack the Court. It will be a delicate balance for them to find the parts of law they can get away with altering without causing massive public backlash.

Yeah I agree that that could happen in the long run (particularly as a Conservative court faces an increasingly liberalizing general population), I just don't think Democrats will ever expect or trust the Court to moderate or shift into a theoretical position that may have been in place with Garland in there.

I don't think they should, either. We're just entering uncharted waters here and I'm trying to prepare myself for whatever could be coming.

i think there is at least one witness in the yale incident that acknowledged it happened

a lot of folks are having amnesia when asked by the press right now but if these were subpeonas they Can’t Deny He perved

who knows the extent of the FBI background checks it’s not like they have prevented other people from entering US Govt just bc they are pervs

BurtReynolds wrote:

Strat wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:Like I said: the invention of chili cheese fries was our warning of societal decay, and we didn't listen.

This is where we were always headed, and it's too late to turn back now.

What in gods name do you have against chili cheese fries??

They are a harbinger of our doom.

Where you gettin your chili from?

So, if Kavanaugh drops out and Democrats win the Senate, Mitch McConnell says "fuck the will of the people" and plows through with a vote on a new shitbag before January, right?

B wrote:So, if Kavanaugh drops out and Democrats win the Senate, Mitch McConnell says "fuck the will of the people" and plows through with a vote on a new shitbag before January, right?

Absolutely.

Without a doubt.

He'd be a fool not to.

B wrote:So, if Kavanaugh drops out and Democrats win the Senate, Mitch McConnell says "fuck the will of the people" and plows through with a vote on a new shitbag before January, right?

You're talking about Mr. "say no to everything" and you have to ask?