Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hill)   Presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke goes for the low-hanging fruit, says adding SCOTUS justices is worth exploring   (thehill.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Supreme Court of the United States, Francis O'Rourke O'Rourke, Trump administration, President of the United States, hand movements Warren, Sens. Bernie Sanders Bernard, George W. Bush, SCOTUS justices  
•       •       •

514 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Mar 2019 at 3:56 PM (10 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



56 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2019-03-15 01:47:53 PM  
So, does Beto Boop just plan to throw the current justices out on their asses so he can implement this cunning plan?

/Also, once RBG is DOA, the right will likely secure dominance in the Supreme Court for the next two to three decades at least.  They won't be amenable to changing the rules anytime soon.
 
2019-03-15 02:12:30 PM  
Good.

Otherwise we'll be shivering in the ruins with nothing but thought "at least we tried to compromise" to keep us warm.
 
2019-03-15 02:15:48 PM  
Is that low hanging fruit?
 
2019-03-15 03:10:31 PM  

Il Douchey: So, does Beto Boop just plan to throw the current justices out on their asses so he can implement this cunning plan?


No, Beto Boop apparently knows something you don't: the Constitution doesn't have any requirements for the number of SCOTUS justices (though arguably, there must be at least one). Originally, there were six. It wasn't raised to nine until 1869. And FDR proposed adding 6 more - one for each justice over 70 that refused to retire.
 
2019-03-15 03:15:12 PM  
Yes this absolutely.
 
2019-03-15 03:18:43 PM  
I hope he appoints 12 of the youngest, healthiest, most liberal, female minority judges he can find!
 
2019-03-15 03:59:08 PM  

Il Douchey: So, does Beto Boop just plan to throw the current justices out on their asses so he can implement this cunning plan?

/Also, once RBG is DOA, the right will likely secure dominance in the Supreme Court for the next two to three decades at least.  They won't be amenable to changing the rules anytime soon.


As Th. indicated, repeal or revise the Judiciary Act, and we can put as many or as few on SCOTUS as we like.

(2 x 10 to the 8th) justices should do it.
 
2019-03-15 04:01:11 PM  
The year is 2102, every US citizen is a Supreme Court Justice, and Roe v Wade STILL isn't overturned
 
2019-03-15 04:01:29 PM  
Every president should get two per term. Finally there would be thousand judeges each ridind a motorcycle... passing judgement!
 
2019-03-15 04:01:57 PM  
I'm fine with that. Enough with letting Not Garland and Boof Beer hold us hostage because Mitch didn't like the blah man nominating anyone.

/AOC must like Beto getting all the attention now
 
2019-03-15 04:02:00 PM  
Screw the SCOTUS. Just put everything up to a popular vote. Worked for Brexit, didn't it?
 
2019-03-15 04:02:58 PM  
The Republicans stole 2 seats.  I say add 3 more justices.

Also, make Obama one of them.  Just to really make them froth.  And because he'd be awesome as a SCOTUS judge.
 
2019-03-15 04:03:57 PM  
Beto was a member of Cult of the Dead Cow
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/​s​pecial-report/usa-politics-beto-orourk​e/

/my views of him has went up a lot
 
2019-03-15 04:04:07 PM  
I'd be fine if instead of adding them we remove those justices that were put in by a compromised Senate and Presidency.
 
2019-03-15 04:07:07 PM  

mr lawson: Beto was a member of Cult of the Dead Cow
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/s​pecial-report/usa-politics-beto-orourk​e/

/my views of him has went up a lot


Yeah. It appears that his early punk rock roots may be more legitimate than just his band.
 
2019-03-15 04:08:11 PM  
I can't wait until the next POTUS tries this and the Republicans start crying about norms and process
 
2019-03-15 04:08:46 PM  

red230: I'd be fine if instead of adding them we remove those justices that were put in by a compromised Senate and Presidency.


I still wonder if Kennedy suddenly retiring had anything to do with his son's work at Deutschebank. I hope someone is looking into that.
 
2019-03-15 04:09:01 PM  
Better off subtracting a couple added by an invalid President.
 
2019-03-15 04:09:05 PM  
He's "no longer sure" we should have single payer, you can flush him down the toilet
 
2019-03-15 04:10:17 PM  

CPennypacker: I can't wait until the next POTUS tries this and the Republicans start crying about norms and process


They'll biatch and moan and then when they take back power will appoint twenty more judges followed by a constitutional amendment locking future presidents to two. Because hypocrisy knows no bounds.
 
2019-03-15 04:10:31 PM  

Il Douchey: So, does Beto Boop just plan to throw the current justices out on their asses so he can implement this cunning plan?

/Also, once RBG is DOA, the right will likely secure dominance in the Supreme Court for the next two to three decades at least.  They won't be amenable to changing the rules anytime soon.


It's really awesome how you jumped all over this without basic understanding of the issue.  Glad we have theaetetus to straighten out your stupidity.  Damn did I almost misspell Theaetetus (glad I looked).

Anyway your comment is the dumbest thing I've read today...so far
 
2019-03-15 04:14:46 PM  

mr lawson: Beto was a member of Cult of the Dead Cow
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/s​pecial-report/usa-politics-beto-orourk​e/

/my views of him has went up a lot


Basically everyone who spent a lot of time time on BBSes at the time had at least some connection to them, especially those who were in Texas.
 
2019-03-15 04:15:44 PM  

Il Douchey: So, does Beto Boop just plan to throw the current justices out on their asses so he can implement this cunning plan?

/Also, once RBG is DOA, the right will likely secure dominance in the Supreme Court for the next two to three decades at least.  They won't be amenable to changing the rules anytime soon.


Kavanaugh needs to be impeached for his behavior before Congress, which included perjury at least twice.
 
2019-03-15 04:19:38 PM  
I wouldn't mind having 11 justices in total, with a 22 year maximum length. Each president gets to replace one every two years. The ones currently in the SC are grandfathered in for life, but when one retires or dies, the person who replaces them and the two new ones get the 22 year clock.

This is kind of how they replace people on the Federal Reserve - they get a long enough time to serve, but it's not for life, either.
 
2019-03-15 04:19:41 PM  
We need to add a left-leaning judge to 'cancel' right-wing Gorsuch and make a collective moderate (Garland)

If you view Trump as illegitimate, then we need to add another leftie to cancel Kavanaugh and make a moderate (Kennedy), and another leftie to make a collective left-winger.

So, either 1 or 3, depending on your view of Trump.
 
2019-03-15 04:19:50 PM  
Yes, no way will Republicans ever copy this behavior whenever they get control again.
 
2019-03-15 04:21:19 PM  

Eegah: We need to add a left-leaning judge to 'cancel' right-wing Gorsuch and make a collective moderate (Garland)

If you view Trump as illegitimate, then we need to add another leftie to cancel Kavanaugh and make a moderate (Kennedy), and another leftie to make a collective left-winger.

So, either 1 or 3, depending on your view of Trump.


Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh should all be impeached, and there should be at a minimum 15 justices
 
2019-03-15 04:23:23 PM  

FlameDuck: Every president should get two per term. Finally there would be thousand judeges each ridind a motorcycle... passing judgement!


One per term might not be a bad idea. That might sell better than a POTUS being able to add an unlimited number.
 
2019-03-15 04:23:24 PM  
Also, there should be one congressional rep for every 100k Americans.

Sorry if the logistics are challenging.
 
2019-03-15 04:26:06 PM  

cirby: mr lawson: Beto was a member of Cult of the Dead Cow
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/s​pecial-report/usa-politics-beto-orourk​e/

/my views of him has went up a lot

Basically everyone who spent a lot of time time on BBSes at the time had at least some connection to them, especially those who were in Texas.


yeah...i was here in tn and posted a few times with them. learned some cool stuff from them.
 
2019-03-15 04:26:06 PM  
DO NOT mess with the Psychedelic Warlord

This guy gets better and better.
 
2019-03-15 04:27:53 PM  
Oh, Beto.

66.media.tumblr.comView Full Size
 
2019-03-15 04:30:11 PM  
Question. In order to add more justices, wouldn't the President need to get them confirmed by the Senate? If the Republicans still control the Senate after the next election then how is a Democratic president going to be able to do anything about the SCOTUS?
 
2019-03-15 04:30:35 PM  

mr lawson: Beto was a member of Cult of the Dead Cow
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/s​pecial-report/usa-politics-beto-orourk​e/

/my views of him has went up a lot


cirby: mr lawson: Beto was a member of Cult of the Dead Cow
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/s​pecial-report/usa-politics-beto-orourk​e/

/my views of him has went up a lot

Basically everyone who spent a lot of time time on BBSes at the time had at least some connection to them, especially those who were in Texas.


I was a member of Pirate/Anarchist group called Anarchist's R Us in New  Orleans, and more than likely crossed paths with Beto in the Day.  The big group in our our area was the NOPG.

We got narced on and busted for Phreaking by a kid who got caught and could not keep his mouth shut"theflatline is the guy who wrote the autodialer).

Unfortunately, my handle was Software Jockey, or Soft Jock for short, not very forward thinking.

But we did get written up in Phrack, so we got that going for us.

Betos article was amazingly well written for a 14 year old.

http://textfiles.com/groups/CDC/cDc-0​0​31.txt?fbclid=IwAR0D5VJxONBiJkYmHzntni​SpFvlHo76lU-LiEqbsS-6LAuZWkC2joMoADeo

What people do not realize about those days that if you had a computer and you could get online(and I am not talking about AOL, Compuserve) then generally you were pretty farking intelligent.  A lot of ideas were bantered back and forth.

I totally forgot about most of that part of my life until I found a text file I wrote conserved for posterity(uggh)

I was told in high school to write a paper about a fictional person in the media, to do a background on them.

Well, I have always hated advertising(even though I worked in it for awhile) and at 15 I chose to write about Herb.  Herb was a promotional character from Burger King.

I was suspended for three days.

http://www.textfiles.com/humor/herb!.h​um

My file seem silly til you read the bottom.

/old school street cred.

/The guys in my group still talk.  One works for Apple, the other retired from Symantec, one is an engineer, and the other runs power grids.
 
2019-03-15 04:34:39 PM  

Pincy: Question. In order to add more justices, wouldn't the President need to get them confirmed by the Senate? If the Republicans still control the Senate after the next election then how is a Democratic president going to be able to do anything about the SCOTUS?


In order to add more justices, they'd also need Congress to amend the Judiciary Act. If the Republicans control the Senate, that ain't happening anyway.
 
2019-03-15 04:34:49 PM  

Pincy: Question. In order to add more justices, wouldn't the President need to get them confirmed by the Senate? If the Republicans still control the Senate after the next election then how is a Democratic president going to be able to do anything about the SCOTUS?


You answered your own question

The Democrats would have to own each chamber to do it.
 
2019-03-15 04:36:15 PM  
21.

Twenty One is the magic number
 
2019-03-15 04:37:56 PM  
pbs.twimg.comView Full Size
 
2019-03-15 04:37:56 PM  

Theaetetus: Il Douchey: So, does Beto Boop just plan to throw the current justices out on their asses so he can implement this cunning plan?

No, Beto Boop apparently knows something you don't: the Constitution doesn't have any requirements for the number of SCOTUS justices (though arguably, there must be at least one). Originally, there were six. It wasn't raised to nine until 1869. And FDR proposed adding 6 more - one for each justice over 70 that refused to retire.


My point is that we currently have nine sitting judges who don't fit neatly into Beto's boxes.  How would we choose who the first ten  justices would be?  More importantly, who would get to choose?
 
2019-03-15 04:38:58 PM  

Il Douchey: Theaetetus: Il Douchey: So, does Beto Boop just plan to throw the current justices out on their asses so he can implement this cunning plan?

No, Beto Boop apparently knows something you don't: the Constitution doesn't have any requirements for the number of SCOTUS justices (though arguably, there must be at least one). Originally, there were six. It wasn't raised to nine until 1869. And FDR proposed adding 6 more - one for each justice over 70 that refused to retire.

My point is that we currently have nine sitting judges who don't fit neatly into Beto's boxes.  How would we choose who the first ten  justices would be?  More importantly, who would get to choose?


president nominates them, senate confirms them same as always ?
 
2019-03-15 04:39:06 PM  

JAGChem82: I wouldn't mind having 11 justices in total, with a 22 year maximum length. Each president gets to replace one every two years. The ones currently in the SC are grandfathered in for life, but when one retires or dies, the person who replaces them and the two new ones get the 22 year clock.

This is kind of how they replace people on the Federal Reserve - they get a long enough time to serve, but it's not for life, either.


This sounds good. Perhaps a couple stipulations, mostly to prevent Senate shenanigans holding seats open indefinitely? Stuff like requiring the Senate to vote within a certain timeframe (which is clearly achievable) and covering vacancies from death/resignation/impeachment.
 
2019-03-15 04:57:07 PM  
not a bad idea, however it locks us into a 2 party system even more so...

/not that its ever going to change in my lifetime...
 
2019-03-15 05:00:14 PM  
When considering change, also consider the worst ways it will be abused, and assume that will happen at some point. That's why we're going through this "emergency declaration" crap.

/And this "Trump presidency" crap.
 
2019-03-15 05:26:11 PM  

bart2puck: not a bad idea, however it locks us into a 2 party system even more so...

/not that its ever going to change in my lifetime...


Is there some part of this suggestion that says "only Democrats and Republicans get to nominate justices"?
 
2019-03-15 05:32:17 PM  

Il Douchey: Theaetetus: Il Douchey: So, does Beto Boop just plan to throw the current justices out on their asses so he can implement this cunning plan?

No, Beto Boop apparently knows something you don't: the Constitution doesn't have any requirements for the number of SCOTUS justices (though arguably, there must be at least one). Originally, there were six. It wasn't raised to nine until 1869. And FDR proposed adding 6 more - one for each justice over 70 that refused to retire.

My point is that we currently have nine sitting judges who don't fit neatly into Beto's boxes.  How would we choose who the first ten  justices would be?  More importantly, who would get to choose?


The 9 get to stay. You can't remove SCOTUS judges except via impeachment. He'd be adding at least one more, so you'd only be choosing that one or more.
 
2019-03-15 05:33:02 PM  

qorkfiend: bart2puck: not a bad idea, however it locks us into a 2 party system even more so...

/not that its ever going to change in my lifetime...

Is there some part of this suggestion that says "only Democrats and Republicans get to nominate justices"?


Yes.

""What if there were five justices selected by Democrats, five justices selected by Republicans and...."
 
2019-03-15 05:33:42 PM  
Again, what's to stop Republicans from adding more additional justices when they get control again?

Best suggestion in this thread is for every President to get one per term. That also fixes the whole "you get more based on the completely arbitrary measure of how many die during your term" and also the whole "intentionally resigning while your party is in the WH to keep the balance from ever changing" thing.
 
2019-03-15 05:51:45 PM  

Il Douchey: Theaetetus: Il Douchey: So, does Beto Boop just plan to throw the current justices out on their asses so he can implement this cunning plan?

No, Beto Boop apparently knows something you don't: the Constitution doesn't have any requirements for the number of SCOTUS justices (though arguably, there must be at least one). Originally, there were six. It wasn't raised to nine until 1869. And FDR proposed adding 6 more - one for each justice over 70 that refused to retire.

My point is that we currently have nine sitting judges who don't fit neatly into Beto's boxes.  How would we choose who the first ten  justices would be?  More importantly, who would get to choose?


How can you claim to have a "point" when you don't understand the basic facts of the article or how a SCOTUS justice is appointed.  Stop posting & delete your account
 
2019-03-15 05:59:40 PM  
It should be 7-2 Democratically appointed justices. If the slave owner protecting electoral college had been abolished after the war where the South got their asses all kinds of KICKED!!!
 
2019-03-15 06:04:17 PM  

Fireproof: Again, what's to stop Republicans from adding more additional justices when they get control again?

Best suggestion in this thread is for every President to get one per term. That also fixes the whole "you get more based on the completely arbitrary measure of how many die during your term" and also the whole "intentionally resigning while your party is in the WH to keep the balance from ever changing" thing.


The answer as always is absolutely nothing.

Also FDR was elected president 4 times and he got his rear end handed to him on the court packing scheme.

But packing the court by adding more judges is pretending that the Republicans will never control the senate and the presidency ever again.

The answer to how can you stop Republicans from doing this in the future is win elections, (Gerrymandering advantage doesn't apply to the senate, and not a scant 5-8 years ago a lot of talk was being thrown around that the electoral college would ensure permanent democratic presidents forever)

Honestly, as much as everyone would hate to hear this, the best thing to happen to the country would be to elect a president who ran on a platform of "I'm going to do nothing but focus on reigning in the imperial presidency and expanding and solidifying voting rights" and basically spend their entire term at looking at everything Trump has been able to do in the oval office and signing off on laws to ban most of it.  And frankly it would probably take an entire presidential term to do so.

/I'd be open to the rotational justice where they cycle out by seniority, but still if its once a presidential term you're talking one every 4 years, so someone could serve a maximum of 36 years which brings up a not insignificant possibility of still needing to replace dying justices, especially for....well the first 9 replacements....(Maybe exempt the chief justice...)

//granted everyone here would cheer for the first replacement of Thomas, but then immediately yell that its an unjust system when Ginsburg and Breyer went next.

///I'm just rambling at this point, I try to only lightly visit the politics tab.
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report