ForumGarden

tude dog wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:58 am

spot wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:21 am I expect there will be three new appointees by next summer, taking the total of Supreme Court Justices to twelve. It's a minor matter but it does rebalance the current bias.

Current bias?

You want Trump to appoint three more jurors?

spot wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 3:51 pm You appear to be stuck with a constitution which has been gamed. I doubt it's the first time.

LarsMac wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 4:14 pm

spot wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 3:51 pm You appear to be stuck with a constitution which has been gamed. I doubt it's the first time.

It is the Senate that has been gamed.
Fix that, and the SC will be fine.

tude dog wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:00 pm

LarsMac wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 4:14 pm

spot wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 3:51 pm You appear to be stuck with a constitution which has been gamed. I doubt it's the first time.

It is the Senate that has been gamed.
Fix that, and the SC will be fine.

I don't understand how the Senate can be gamed or of any problem with the SC.

LarsMac wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:27 pm

tude dog wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:00 pm

LarsMac wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 4:14 pm

spot wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 3:51 pm You appear to be stuck with a constitution which has been gamed. I doubt it's the first time.

It is the Senate that has been gamed.
Fix that, and the SC will be fine.

I don't understand how the Senate can be gamed or of any problem with the SC.

It's all about the 2-party system. Think on it a while. It will come to you. Imagine being at a poker game with only two players.
You DO play Poker, right?

tude dog wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:21 am

LarsMac wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:27 pm

tude dog wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:00 pm

LarsMac wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 4:14 pm

spot wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 3:51 pm You appear to be stuck with a constitution which has been gamed. I doubt it's the first time.

It is the Senate that has been gamed.
Fix that, and the SC will be fine.

I don't understand how the Senate can be gamed or of any problem with the SC.

It's all about the 2-party system. Think on it a while. It will come to you. Imagine being at a poker game with only two players.
You DO play Poker, right?

Actually, I do not play poker and rarely played any game of chance. Mostly because I am not all that interested in paying the cost to learn how to play well and still lose money.

I think I know what you are trying to say.

US Democrat Jim Clyburn says expand Supreme Court

One of the most senior Democrats in Congress, House majority whip Jim Clyburn has said he is in favour of increasing the size of the Supreme Court from its current level of nine judges, but further research was needed on the appropriate number.

Mr Clyburn told Hardtalk's Stephen Sackur that Supreme Court had not always had nine members.

"Why did we go to nine? So the question is do we need to go to 11, 12, 13? I think a baker's dozen might be a good number," he said.

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden has refused to make clear whether he supports expanding the number of justices, and recently said he would appoint a bipartisan commission to study whether a review of the judiciary was needed if he wins the White House.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-54733589

spot wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 5:48 am

US Democrat Jim Clyburn says expand Supreme Court

One of the most senior Democrats in Congress, House majority whip Jim Clyburn has said he is in favour of increasing the size of the Supreme Court from its current level of nine judges, but further research was needed on the appropriate number.

Mr Clyburn told Hardtalk's Stephen Sackur that Supreme Court had not always had nine members.

"Why did we go to nine? So the question is do we need to go to 11, 12, 13? I think a baker's dozen might be a good number," he said.

History of the Supreme Court; https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/institution.aspx

Why nine for the last 120 years now needs examination.?

The answer is simple in that they lost an election and now are not happy.

spot wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 5:48 amDemocratic presidential candidate Joe Biden has refused to make clear whether he supports expanding the number of justices, and recently said he would appoint a bipartisan commission to study whether a review of the judiciary was needed if he wins the White House.

Sleepy is running away.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-54733589

tude dog wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 1:43 pm The answer is simple in that they lost an election and now are not happy.

spot wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 1:56 pm

tude dog wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 1:43 pm The answer is simple in that they lost an election and now are not happy.

They did?

When did they?

tude dog wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 2:55 pm

spot wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 1:56 pm

tude dog wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 1:43 pm The answer is simple in that they lost an election and now are not happy.

They did?

When did they?

2019 when Trump was elected President.