"Will you shut up, man?" US Politics October 2020

Assuming their new true SC believer is installed but does not throw a wrench in the election works - which *would* be tantamount to a coup, with no exaggeration - I think expanding the court or some other radical recalibration, is necessary. The past four years have seen so much bending/breaking/ignoring the rules/laws/ethics, from flouting subpoenas to not confirming cabinet members on down/up, that the entire system of government needs to be shored up so that this can't happen again (Laura Ingraham otm?). Mitch boasting that he expects all these laws and shit to be reversed but that the SC will take years to correct is just one of many final straws. We've got too many asterisks in the books.

Question: if more justices are appointed, will that spark a ... legal challenge? And if so, can the current 9 member Supreme Court find the addition of more justices unconstitutional?

Get those doggies goin'

lol

Genius at work

Asked for update on Trump’s prospects in race, @jaredkushner on Fox: “I speak to all my state directors...”

He said “polling with phones“ now “an obsolete method, especially in the era of cancel culture.” Some pollsters “in the business for a long time” are “snake oil salesmen.” pic.twitter.com/TJhnUtG7HQ

— Jennifer Jacobs (@JenniferJJacobs) October 26, 2020

The court has been several different sizes. Nine justices dates from the Judiciary Act of 1869. But there's no reason why a congressional act can't change the number. If a democratic congress writes a clean bill, and it passes, that could become the new number.

Any ability for the court to rule on its own composition would have to come up through lower courts, and the grounds for such a case would have to be constitutional grounds - not just "we don't like that law."

saw this in a tweet earlier

Republicans have confirmed 15 of the last 19 SC justices. They've also won the popular vote once in the last 7 elections

Early vote now almost 60.1 million — less than I was guessing but in line per Election Project with no mail on Sunday and less activity in general. Still on track for big numbers for this week.

And if so, can the current 9 member Supreme Court find the addition of more justices unconstitutional?

When FDR said he was going to add more justices in the 30s, it failed because it was unpopular, not unconstitutional. The US has increased (and lowered!) the number of SC justices before, and they can do it again. As simple as Congress passing a law and the President signing it. The only real thing preventing it from happening in the modern era is a shared recognition between the parties that messing with the Supreme Court like that would destroy its legitimacy and make the country unstable. Well, the Republicans decided they DGAF about that, so now (as usual) the Democrats have to A. fix it and B. get shit on for trying to fix it.

I would find it hilarious if a Dem Senate in 2021 decreased the number of justices to seven and removed Kavanaugh and Barrett, then in 2022 raised it back to nine again and appointed two new liberal justices. It would wipe the smile off McConnell's face.

holy shit

Jared Kushner on Fox News about the black community:

"President Trump's policies are the policies that can help people break out of the problems that they're complaining about, but he can't want them to be successful more than they want to be successful."

— Misyrlena Egkolfopoulou (@misyrlena) October 26, 2020

Jesus

xpost I'm not sure anyone can simultaneously hold that position that the SC needs to be recalibrated because of years of unfairness and dubious shenanigans and cheating and that it *can* be recalibrated because that right is in the constitution and there's precedent for the number of justices being changed. One of the reasons this needs to be addressed is that tradition, precedent etc. have been eroded down to nubs. The SC itself gets to ultimately decide what is or is not constitutional, and they do so for bullshit reasons or based on blurry/inconsistent compromise all the time. There are lots of "popular" things that hang in the balance because the SC is currently full of shit and would/will shape the constitution to suit their desired outcome.

That said, I *love* the idea of Kav and Barrett getting kicked off, and then the court reconstituted with new liberal justices.

The SC itself gets to ultimately decide what is or is not constitutional,

Heh, and not even this point is constitutional. John Marshall in essence decreed it so in Marbury.

So after she gets confirmed today, realistically how quickly can they ram through something with ramifications for the election already in progress?

I would find it hilarious if a Dem Senate in 2021 decreased the number of justices to seven and removed Kavanaugh and Barrett

thomas and barrett plz

Thomas is 72 and will retire before too long, Kav is young so he needs to go now before he has a chance to do a keg stand on the next 30 years of jurisprudence.

The Keg Stand of Jurisprudence = Kav's memoir title.

Are U. of Wisconsin/YouGov reputable snake oil salesman?

Wisconsin -- Biden +9
Michigan -- Biden +10
Pennsylvania -- Biden +8

That would be the election right there.

removing existing judges WOULD hit a constitutional speed bump. article iii specifies that the justices "shall hold their offices during good behavior," which has long been interpreted as "for life."

changing THAT really would open up a checks-and-balances question - if the congress can just kick out justices it doesn't like by mere legislation (rather than the more onerous impeachment process) then the judiciary is nakedly a committee serving at the pleasure of the legislature and judicial review is replaced by judicial rubber-stamp with constant threat of removal. we could say that's not THAT far from where Mitch has put us but i think in terms of public opinion it'd be a MUCH harder uphill battle than just adding more justices.

xpost to clemenza -- yep, I'm playing with the map and basically not seeing any way for Biden to lose if he takes those 3.

every state should get a justice on the Supreme Court

also each territory, and each international ally

also, everyone in India

I want over a billion people on the Supreme Court

He said “polling with phones“ now “an obsolete method, especially in the era of cancel culture.”

what the fuck does "cancel culture" have to do with phone polling?

America: Over one billion justices served

xpost People canceling their landlines?

100% has "cancel culture" mixed up with "wirecutting," lol

oh okay, that makes sense. what a dumbass.

It has more to do with the vacant look in Kushner's eyes than it does to any real world phenomenon afaict.

rasmussen says trump is winning O NO!

at some point in the past four years Republican talking heads just started doing talking points Mad Libs

You gotta listen to Corey Lewandowski on this:
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/521646-state-of-the-race-cancel-culture-and-polling-dont-mix

If I ever got a call from a pollster (which I haven’t), I’d have no fear of answering honestly about which candidate earned my vote.

But not everyone is comfortable sharing what the left and their friends in the media and big institutions have deemed to be an invalid opinion. It can, and does, get you fired. Answering a pollster who called your phone, and knew your name, creates a record of your choice for president. There’s real risk in saying the name “Donald Trump” — someday, it could be used against you.

lol of course it would be an even stupider reason than i was imagining

There’s real risk in saying the name “Donald Trump” — someday, it could be used against you.

to be honest, if i find out someone voted for donald trump, i do think they're a fucking idiot

so best not to mention that during a job interview i guess, because holy shit, it would be hard to avoid pulling out an airhorn and blasting it

Uh.

Rep. Denver Riggleman (R) on MTP re: Qanon : ‘these are people who think Lord of the Rings is a documentary’

— amy walter (@amyewalter) October 25, 2020

I want over a billion people on the Supreme Court

― shout-out to his family (DJP), Monday, October 26, 2020 10:47 AM bookmarkflaglink

"goddammit, another 500,000,001 - 499,999,999 decision"

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/513K0iwRuKL.jpg

dammit Justice Ken Bone screwed us again

Billions and billions of Stare Decisis

if only 1 out of every million supreme court justices are on the toilet during the zoom call, there are a 1000 SC justices on the toilet during the zoom call. and it only takes 1 person to accidentally unmute to cause mayhem.

that's the main reason the idea isn't feasible, sorry djp

This is the main reason why the idea must be implemented post haste, IMO

every week, someone pulls a Toobin

^and now the threat of COVID-19 makes more sense due to that analogy

xpost.

xpost?

ex - post.

Imagine the betting markets!

By the time each vote was decided we'd all be dead.

Judge Donnie Yen has threatened the Republican bloc

This is the main reason why the idea must be implemented post haste

as an originalist and constitutional scholar, i remember the Section that says if it's your idea to add a billion SC justices to the court, you have to run the zoom call every week

https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/w780/nc09or0CIHATMyGFs8aPqNEPJvX.jpg

" 500,000,001 - 499,999,999 decision AGAIN!?!"

Bolo has been warned about being a provocateur, begin impeachment

Makes sense to name every US citizen a Supreme Court justice. That way, we just vote on these cases as they come up. I know there would not be enough in the federal budget for robes-for-all, but I'm sure there's enough for everybody to at least get a commemorative coffee mug.