5-4; 5-4...

[dajoki]

I've listened long enough to see where this is going, today the s. court will decide that we have a king. Our only hope is a landslide win in November wiping all of the pukes out of power. Then we must stack the courts to their fullest and never allow this to happen again.

[GusFring]

1. Are they deciding today?

[Drunken Irishman]

2. No. They won't until summer.

[jberryhill]

3. no

[GusFring]

4. Carey Dune is already better than Douglas fucking Letter.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

5. In many cases, after a landslide we can get some tough laws through that would be hard to overturn

Like requiring tax returns to run.

Like clear unassailable sunshine laws to require testimony and presentation of documents when requested by Congress.

So much to do.

[brooklynite]

10. You CANNOT pass a Federal Law requiring tax returns to run for President...

...because we don’t have a Federal Presidential Election. Per the Constitution, each STATE decides how to select Electors (an Election isn’t even necessary).

[SoonerPride]

13. I thought several states tried to require a tax return and those laws were thrown out

So then what?

[brooklynite]

15. They were thrown out by STATE Courts...

...doesn't mean that anything is possible at the Federal level.

[shockey80]

7. If that happens, the supreme court will be torn to pieces by the news media and the people.

The majority of the American people will know that decision puts Trump above the law, all future presidents above the law.

[Eliot Rosewater]

8. Yeah, wont matter. Media will pay little attention to it like they do all the

vile crimes committed by the rumpster and the GOP.

Still torturing children on the border, getting sick etc.

Nothing is done.

[Miguelito Loveless]

23. And?

The only way to fix the court is expand the bench to 13-15 members.

[PRETZEL]

9. Question to those more learned than I,

been trying to keep up here while still working.

It seems by most accounts, the House attorney did not have his best day, (or as others have said, he stunk),

however, realistically how much weight is put on oral arguments vs. the briefs that were filed prior to the oral arguments?

[Maraya1969]

12. I think you make a good point. How good is a Supreme Court if they make their decisions

based on how well an attorney argues their point?

SCOTUS is supposed to do their own research I would think and not be swayed by some impressive attorney. They are supposed to seek out the truth.

[qazplm135]

19. Very little in most cases

And you can't always tell votes from questions asked.

Still I would be shocked at a decision requiring Trump to give up his tax returns. That was never going to happen. It only happens in a criminal trial after his presidency.

[dalton99a]

11. Democrats must expand the court, or we will be under their veto power forever.

Get rid of the Senate filibuster, and add 5 or 6 seats

[Amishman]

14. yes, we must ensure one party rule

then abolish the Republicans and all other opposition parties



I am so very not comfortable with court stacking.

I want a functional government with multiple viewpoints, not single party rule.

[dalton99a]

16. A functional government that reflects the will of the majority of voters

not some bullshit 9-seat limitation that perpetuates minority rule

[Amishman]

18. needs to be some continuity and checks

otherwise we wouldn't have three branches of government with separation of duties; instead we'd just pick a political party and let them decide the rest.

stacking the courts is a red line for me. I will not support it. Picking the best candidates for openings is fine, that is not abusing the system to usurp power. expanding and stacking the courts to seize power is just as fascist as the republicans voter suppression.

[Fullduplexxx]

17. They are already stacked. dems adding to scotus would be merely a correcting

Of the republican court stacking

[dalton99a]

25. Exactly. The Supreme Court is not some sacred temple of law and equity

it is a political institution.

[Tarheel_Dem]

26. Perhaps the poster should have made clear that we need to "unstack" the courts. The GOP has...

been really busy doing just that since the 2016 election. So many unprecedented acts have taken place since Pukes took control of the Senate. It started with their refusal to even have hearings on PBO's nomination of Merrick Garland. Anything after that should make one feel less "not comfortable" with anything the Democrats do when/if they return to power.

[uponit7771]

22. +1,

[Yeehah]

21. Well, I agree.

Citizens United requires drastic action.

[BlueIdaho]

24. The legitimacy of the Roberts Court

Is about to be shredded beyond repair. I don’t know of a solution to a court that has become so obviously political but there is little if any reason to respect anything coming from that kangaroo court.