Senate Democrats take on GOP court-packing in blistering new report

[yortsed snacilbuper]

Senate Democrats on Wednesday unveiled a new report on Republican efforts to pack the courts with conservative-leaning judges and the outsized influence of one conservative activist.

"Our report exposes a twisted web of dark money, and special interest groups who behind the scenes are investing millions and millions to plant ideological activist judges completely remake the courts, and ultimately rewrite the Constitution," said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

As part of their report, the senators pointed to activist Leonard Leo, the former head of the conservative Federalist Society, as the driving force behind the many of the president's appointments, including Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch.

During the 2016 campaign, Leo and the Federalist Society gave then-candidate Trump a list of Supreme Court nominees, which Trump later made public to win over the support of mainstream Republicans.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/senate-democrats-take-on-gop-court-packing-in-blistering-new-report/ar-BB14GpCq?ocid=msedgntp

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/leonard-leo-federalists-society-courts/

[Alpeduez21]

1. Fuck you Jill Stein voters and those that stayed home

[old guy]

3. Yeah, and then some.

[poli-junkie]

2. So what are they going to do about it?

It's long overdue to expose The Federalist Society and Opus Dei freaks!

Would Biden packing the Supreme Court dilute its effects?

[pbmus]

4. Adding 6 judges would be the answer...

[BComplex]

5. Or making sure a few of the existing ones would do us a favor, though.

I don't know. It works for trump!

[Amishman]

8. Still not comfortable with this

Packing the courts by adding seats seams like a bad precedent for the future and is every bit as undemocratic as the worst of their shit.

I won't support it.

[Mike Niendorff]

10. Bad precedent? Seriously?

Every single New Deal benefit you enjoy today is because FDR threatened -- just threatened -- to expand the Court in 1937.

Let's also be clear: the Supreme Court did not start with 9 members. It began with 6. It got as high as 10 during the Civil War, then settled down to 9 and ultimately was set at 9 by federal law (again, this is *purely a federal law* (28 USC 1) -- the Constitution doesn't set the number of Justices on the Supreme Court, it is controlled by a single federal law, which can be changed if Congress decides to do so.)

And don't get me started on "precedent" after the Merrick Garland fiasco. After that, I don't see how anyone can argue for the legitimacy of the current Court's composition.

If ever there was a time to revisit 28 USC 1, that time is now.


MDN

[Hermit-The-Prog]

11. Tell it!

[Celerity]

12. if Trump is reelected, and they hold the Senate, and Rump takes the SCOTUS to 7-2 or even 8-1 HARD

RW (Sotomayor has bad, chronic diabetes that has landed her in the hospital), PLUS replaces the ageing thug Tomas with a newer model, you will support it. If you do not, then I would put you into the 'break up the union' camp (large Blue states out) as that is what will eventually happen. Zero chance the Blue states will suffer under a complete rollback of post-Brown v Board civil rights (and Brown itself) and then a Gilead style theocracy (funny that states' rights will go out the window for the Rethugs) will be attempted (at gunpoint) nationally.

Yep, you will support it if even just that first part (7-2 or 8-1 hard RW SCOTUS) happens.

Just my prediction, as there is zero chance we get to 2/3rds majority control in the Senate needed to impeach and remove the virulent RW scum the Rethugs had littered (and will further litter) the Federal Judiciary (at all levels) with.

btw,

you said

is every bit as undemocratic as the worst of their shit.

it cannot be 'undemocratic' if it is done under the rubric of a democratically elected government, and adheres to US Constitutional rules, boundaries, and law.

[pbmus]

13. Unfortunately your timidity has brought us to the brink of destruction...

They bring machine guns, we bring knives...

[Frustratedlady]

6. Didn't they pepper the courts with a lot of Liberty University alumni?

I seem to remember reading about that a few months back. I don't think they have a good track record and we certainly don't need any Falwell influence in our courts.

[Historic NY]

7. Just to be clear there a sources and methods that will make some move on...

you know Republicons would use them.

[erronis]

9. Intriguing. Could you elaborate a bit?

Are you talking about digging dirt on (r)epuglicon (or libertarian) appointed judges?

We have more dirt on the turd sitting in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue than the Marquis de Sade ever wanted.

We have dirt on the Chinese/Moscow-axis traitor sitting as the Senate "leader".

Every (r)epuglicon elected within the last 20 years comes with a baggage of shit that can be exposed.

I agree - get this smelly mess out there. But who will care?

[crickets]

14. K&R for the post and the discussion.