ADVERTISEMENT

Why do ignorant fools think it's a big deal that there are only 8 Justices?

YellowSnow51

HB King
Aug 14, 2002
62,402
4,328
113
We had 6 for a long time and quite often we have 8 or 7 due to recusals. No one ever complained. Hell, they complain when they don't recuse themselves.

Now, I believe what the GOP is doing is bull shit, but not because only having 8 justices is a big deal. Just because it's malfeasance.
 
We had 6 for a long time and quite often we have 8 or 7 due to recusals. No one ever complained. Hell, they complain when they don't recuse themselves.

Now, I believe what the GOP is doing is bull shit, but not because only having 8 justices is a big deal. Just because it's malfeasance.
I'm not sure what they are doing is malfeasance, because Obama wakes up and just does malfeasance all over the place every day. they might be playing a little petty politics, but it is their right to say yay or nay or not even hear the arguments. they are within their rights. malfeasance is different.
 
It's not so much an inherent problem with 8 as it is that the stage is set with a perfect ideological split for a lot of 4/4 decisions. When that happens it basically makes the SCOTUS decision irrelevant and allows the lower court ruling to stand. So many case will effectively be left unresolved if we don't get a tie breaker on the court.

See here: https://iowa.forums.rivals.com/thre...-right-to-vote-in-america.99128/#post-2150208
 
It's not so much an inherent problem with 8 as it is that the stage is set with a perfect ideological split for a lot of 4/4 decisions. When that happens it basically makes the SCOTUS decision irrelevant and allows the lower court ruling to stand. So many case will effectively be left unresolved if we don't get a tie breaker on the court.

See here: https://iowa.forums.rivals.com/thre...-right-to-vote-in-america.99128/#post-2150208
anything we can do make these clowns irrelevant is fine with me!
 
anything we can do make these clowns irrelevant is fine with me!
I know, you hate the constitution and the creator knows it. You're soul will not be downloaded in the great databank on the far side of the moon. Better live it up with me while you can.
 
It's not so much an inherent problem with 8 as it is that the stage is set with a perfect ideological split for a lot of 4/4 decisions. When that happens it basically makes the SCOTUS decision irrelevant and allows the lower court ruling to stand. So many case will effectively be left unresolved if we don't get a tie breaker on the court.

See here: https://iowa.forums.rivals.com/thre...-right-to-vote-in-america.99128/#post-2150208

They're only "resolved" because there's no court higher than the SCOTUS. Any one of those circuit judges could be a SCOTUS justice at some point. We're still getting heavily thought out rulings put out by extremely competent judges.
 
I know, you hate the constitution and the creator knows it. You're soul will not be downloaded in the great databank on the far side of the moon. Better live it up with me while you can.
it says nowhere in the constitution that we are to make laws by: a Kenyan coming up with crap and running it past the black robes of death and hoping communism wins out. I know you think this is how it works because it's been working to your favor lately.
 
They're only "resolved" because there's no court higher than the SCOTUS. Any one of those circuit judges could be a SCOTUS justice at some point. We're still getting heavily thought out rulings put out by extremely competent judges.
Now your just offering a reason to eliminate SCOTUS. If you value SCOTUS then 8 is a problem as it neuters them
 
it says nowhere in the constitution that we are to make laws by: a Kenyan coming up with crap and running it past the black robes of death and hoping communism wins out. I know you think this is how it works because it's been working to your favor lately.
Yes, those exact instructions are in there. Word for word.
 
Now your just offering a reason to eliminate SCOTUS. If you value SCOTUS then 8 is a problem as it neuters them
we need to eliminate scotus, or at least knock them back down a notch. the original intent of this country was to have "several states", without a centralized government. the only government we were to have was to be three EQUAL parts, judiciary and executive and legislative, neither was to have more power than the other, AND NEITHER was to over rule the states' decisions. These decisions were to be stuff like: how much do we TAX
ENGLAND, not americans? How is the fed limiting mankind's worshoping of GOD? How is government limiting RIGHTS? Are we limiting travel at all? we need to stop that. stuff like this.
 
Now your just offering a reason to eliminate SCOTUS. If you value SCOTUS then 8 is a problem as it neuters them

No. I'm not. I'm simply saying it's not as big of an emergency as the people who think it is...is.

That's all and that's what I said. What circuit court rulings up for appeal have the fate of the country standing in the balance? Just another form of fearmongering.
 
we need to eliminate scotus, or at least knock them back down a notch. the original intent of this country was to have "several states", without a centralized government. the only government we were to have was to be three EQUAL parts, judiciary and executive and legislative, neither was to have more power than the other, AND NEITHER was to over rule the states' decisions. These decisions were to be stuff like: how much do we TAX
ENGLAND, not americans? How is the fed limiting mankind's worshoping of GOD? How is government limiting RIGHTS? Are we limiting travel at all? we need to stop that. stuff like this.

And the Articles of Confederation were proven to be completely useless. There was no "original intent" of this country as they flew by the seat of their pants and had to figure it out...and we are still doing so. You know, the whole, "Constitution is a living document" thing.
 
And the Articles of Confederation were proven to be completely useless. There was no "original intent" of this country as they flew by the seat of their pants and had to figure it out...and we are still doing so. You know, the whole, "Constitution is a living document" thing.
well, obviously, especially the last few years, natural loves it right now but wait till a repubber gets in there, what's natural gonna do then?
 
No. I'm not. I'm simply saying it's not as big of an emergency as the people who think it is...is.

That's all and that's what I said. What circuit court rulings up for appeal have the fate of the country standing in the balance? Just another form of fearmongering.
I think you're the first person I've heard express the idea that the stakes are so high.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Funky Bunch
well, obviously, especially the last few years, natural loves it right now but wait till a repubber gets in there, what's natural gonna do then?
Act like you and toss out crazy complaints about everything most likely. Sort of looking forward to a nice long bitch fest and blaming your team for all the problems. Sounds cathartic. But it's pretty shortsighted to say SCOTUS has been going my way. Outside of a very few high profile decisions, it's been going your way for several years.
 
I think you're the first person I've heard express the idea that the stakes are so high.

Sorry. I watch MSNBC. The sky is falling constantly. Of course, you also get those who play the reverse psychology thing too. You know the, "Good...this is gonna work out for liberals anyway." Quite enjoyable.
 
Sorry. I watch MSNBC. The sky is falling constantly. Of course, you also get those who play the reverse psychology thing too. You know the, "Good...this is gonna work out for liberals anyway." Quite enjoyable.
I'm more in that second camp. If we get an appointment, libs win. If we don't, we get the moral high ground and win. And if we don't we also get the predominantly liberal lower rulings to stand and win on the pragmatic front. It's good to be lib.
 
We had 6 for a long time and quite often we have 8 or 7 due to recusals. No one ever complained. Hell, they complain when they don't recuse themselves.

Now, I believe what the GOP is doing is bull shit, but not because only having 8 justices is a big deal. Just because it's malfeasance.


so you are saying
SC_8isEnought.jpg
 
we need to eliminate scotus, or at least knock them back down a notch. the original intent of this country was to have "several states", without a centralized government. the only government we were to have was to be three EQUAL parts, judiciary and executive and legislative, neither was to have more power than the other, AND NEITHER was to over rule the states' decisions. These decisions were to be stuff like: how much do we TAX
ENGLAND, not americans? How is the fed limiting mankind's worshoping of GOD? How is government limiting RIGHTS? Are we limiting travel at all? we need to stop that. stuff like this.

You are rightfully concerned that too much power rests with the federal government through the executive branch and, to some extent, the legislative branch. How that gets addressed by eliminating or knocking back a notch the Supree Court I don't get. Eliminating the Supreme Court would have the opposite effect.
 
Ah yes.........Libs holding the moral high ground. Lib and proud of it.


john-edwards-460_790717c.jpg
images
gary-hart-and-donna-rice.jpg

amd-sunday-news-kennedy-crash-jpg.jpg

lewinsky-year.jpg
I'm sure we can agree there is an field leveling list for the Rs which mean with this latest violation the libs are out in front. It's hard to think of the last time the Rs have held the high ground. Probably because the are never for solving any problems.
 
You are rightfully concerned that too much power rests with the federal government through the executive branch and, to some extent, the legislative branch. How that gets addressed by eliminating or knocking back a notch the Supree Court I don't get. Eliminating the Supreme Court would have the opposite effect.
IMHO -- which means it's fact -- the biggest single problem in our governmental system today is the usurpation of power by the Supreme Court. Justices of both ideologies have contributed, but the lefties have been more prominent. We are essentially to the point where the country is run by a junta of unelected people who serve for life. They are not accountable to anyone or anything, including the Constitution (see Kennedy's majority opinion in Obergefell). This is not what the Founders envisioned because whatever else you can say about the Founders, they were not morons.

On a couple of rare occasions, a long time ago, Congress has limited the appellate jurisdiction of SCOTUS, and I think that's something which should be seriously considered routinely now.
 
IMHO -- which means it's fact -- the biggest single problem in our governmental system today is the usurpation of power by the Supreme Court. Justices of both ideologies have contributed, but the lefties have been more prominent. We are essentially to the point where the country is run by a junta of unelected people who serve for life. They are not accountable to anyone or anything, including the Constitution (see Kennedy's majority opinion in Obergefell). This is not what the Founders envisioned because whatever else you can say about the Founders, they were not morons.

On a couple of rare occasions, a long time ago, Congress has limited the appellate jurisdiction of SCOTUS, and I think that's something which should be seriously considered routinely now.

It's a problem. No doubt. However, how does the Supreme Court contribute to the problem? Usually by upholding the decision of a lower court, so I'm still not seeing how doing away with them would fix anything.
 
They're only "resolved" because there's no court higher than the SCOTUS. Any one of those circuit judges could be a SCOTUS justice at some point. We're still getting heavily thought out rulings put out by extremely competent judges.

This. Even when circuits split, we still have resolution, it just isn't uniform. Plus those SCOTUS rulings wouldn't be irrelevant, just not as decisive. Their rulings on issue-irrelevant matters have been used to support/attack decisions all the time, sometimes even in dissent.
 
IMHO -- which means it's fact -- the biggest single problem in our governmental system today is the usurpation of power by the Supreme Court. Justices of both ideologies have contributed, but the lefties have been more prominent. We are essentially to the point where the country is run by a junta of unelected people who serve for life. They are not accountable to anyone or anything, including the Constitution (see Kennedy's majority opinion in Obergefell). This is not what the Founders envisioned because whatever else you can say about the Founders, they were not morons.

On a couple of rare occasions, a long time ago, Congress has limited the appellate jurisdiction of SCOTUS, and I think that's something which should be seriously considered routinely now.

Silly hyperbole. You pretend that the SCOTUS is invoking some sort of power, and not being asked to decide issues that either can't be agreed on or one side refuses to drop (see: Abortion).

The very case you cite comes from District Court's decisions, not overturning them by some sort of fiat. Should we pretend it would have played out better had they not been allowed to hear it? How so?

If you really want to scale back SCOTUS review, advocate for removing much of the federal code. Congress wants to pass untold number of laws but don't like to be questioned on them. Yes this applies to obergfell as well.
 
The problem is the idea that Congress can refuse to carry out it's Constitutional functions due to a "lame duck" president. But by the idiotic definition used by the GOP, Obama was a "lame duck" as soon as he was elected to his second term. So can Congress refuse to act on anything submitted by a president during his second term?
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT