The Intercept: House and Senate Democrats Plan Bill to Add Four Justices to Supreme Court
The Constitution allows Congress to set the number of Supreme Court justices.
Congressional Democrats plan to unveil legislation expanding the size of the Supreme Court on Thursday, according to three congressional sources familiar with the closely held measure.
The bill would add four seats to the high court, bringing the total to 13 from the current nine. The bill is led by House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler, subcommittee Chair Hank Johnson, and first-term Rep. Mondaire Jones. In the Senate, the bill is being championed by Ed Markey of Massachusetts.
Read more ....
Update #1: Democrats plan to unveil legislation to expand the US supreme court by four seats (The Guardian)
Update #2: Democrats to Unveil Bill to Expand US Supreme Court by 4 Justices (VOA)
WNU Editor: So much for this commission that President Biden enacted just last week ..... Biden forms panel to study possible U.S. Supreme Court expansion (Reuters).
9 comments:
If you can't legally beat 'em, ignore the law. Or change it. Won't matter much in the long run. Libshits point to SC decisions to support their views when it's convenient, and ignore them when it isn't. More evidence that you get what you vote for.
War News Update needs to be recalibrated.
The Democrats are like uranium, when you reach a certain threshold the nature of the beast changes. I wish I could watch form a well stocked spaceship heading for an uninhabited earth like planet around a stable star. These people want what they want and they will surely get it, but they are ignorant, venal and evil.
The Truth About 'Papa John' Schnatter Finally Comes Out
I can't believe Jason Stein and the employees of Laundry Service are so evil. I bet they all vote Democrat.
Why look at a 2 year old controversy? It was a set up and it is a microcosm of all things Democrat.
Reality Bites!
There is no constitutional law stating the required number of members of the Supreme Court. When GOP denied the Dems the right to make their appointment under Obama, the stage was set for the Dems to get their chance up at bat: now you get what you dealt out. Blame yourselves and not the Democratic prty
Still picking out that corn. How does it taste? Are you sad every time you hear a toilet flush and all the corn going to waste? Your mouth waters, when you think of it.
Throughout history the number of spj has changed there was once 15 it happens. There was also NO VOTER FRAUD go drink some more kool-aid
What we learn or should have learned is that the Supreme Court always has a political bias, relative to the person or people naming the Justices. The bias became obvious when the GOP refused to name a new Justice till an election was held, thus making sure that a GOP, ie conservative, justice was appointed and the choice by Obama never got placed on the court. The chickens have come home to roost. Don't like it? Others can play the game you have played.
Go ahead liar, the result is not what you expect, liar.
Merrick Garland is a disaster. I am glad they did not vote to put him on the Supreme Court. When Merrick spoke during confirmation hearing for Attorney General the consensus was "Did you hear that? Thank god he is not on SCOTUS. We dodged a bullet. Merrick is that dumb.
To code shift and talk like Hillary:
I'm in no ways embarrassed that Merrick Garlands nomination was not considered. To the contrary, I believe it was great that it was not considered. He is an 'educated' buffoon.
"Throughout history the number of spj has changed there was once 15 it happens." - X
X stands for eXecrable
"President Franklin D. Roosevelt
***attempted***
to expand the Court in 1937. His proposal envisioned the appointment of one additional justice for each incumbent justice who reached the age of 70 years 6 months and refused retirement, up to a maximum bench of 15 justices."
Was that an outright lie on your part Parrot or are you just that stupid?
Post a Comment