Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senator Al Franken slams supreme court in pro-Sotomayor statement

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
mucifer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 08:52 AM
Original message
Senator Al Franken slams supreme court in pro-Sotomayor statement
This is a really great little 4 minute video Senator Franken discusses the backwards direction of the current supreme court:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_drX9UcSvo

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
goclark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
1. Get Um Al ~ Fantastic!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
2. Al, Telling It It Is. K & R!
Wish there were more like him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 09:09 AM
Response to Original message
3. Holy Smoke! Great job Senator Franken.
So strange to hear someone stand up to the bullies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prostomulgus Donating Member (188 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 09:14 AM
Response to Original message
4. We need to force some of the RW'ers on the court to retire.
Disclose an affair, find a tax problem, uncover an undocumented domestic worker, find some pot in a kid's car. Whatever! Just get one or more of the RW'ers off the court ASAP. We need control of that court NOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dorkulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Obama could just add more seats.
It's been done before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mister Ed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #5
17. A president can arbitrarily add more seats? I don't believe that's true.
I know that FDR tried, and failed. Has there really been a point in U.S. history when a president has added more seats to the Supreme Court?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
csziggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. The Constitution does not say how many are to be on the Supreme Court
The United States Constitution does not specify the size of the Supreme Court. Article III of the Constitution gives Congress the power to fix the number of Justices. The Judiciary Act of 1789 called for the appointment of six Justices. As the country grew geographically, Congress increased the number of Justices to correspond with the growing number of judicial circuits: the court was expanded to seven members in 1807, nine in 1837 and ten in 1863.

At the request of Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, Congress passed the Judicial Circuits Act (1866) which provided that the next three Justices to retire would not be replaced; thus, the size of the Court would eventually reach seven by attrition. Consequently, one seat was removed in 1866 and a second in 1867. However, this law did not play out to its fruition, for in the Judiciary Act of 1869,<7> also known as the Circuit Judges Act, the number of Justices was again set at nine, where it has since remained.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted to expand the Court in 1937; his plan would have allowed the President to appoint one additional Justice for each existing Justice who reached the age of 70 years 6 months but did not retire from the bench, until the Court reached a maximum size of fifteen justices. Ostensibly, the proposal was made to ease the burdens of the docket on the elderly judges, but the President's actual purpose was to add Justices who would favor his New Deal policies, which had been regularly ruled unconstitutional by the Court.<8> This plan, usually called the "Court-packing Plan," failed in Congress. The Court, however, gradually acquiesced to Roosevelt's New Deal programs and thereby removed the President's need to alter it. Within six years eight of the nine justices either retired or died, allowing Roosevelt to appoint eight Justices total to the Supreme Court (second only to George Washington) and to promote one Associate Justice to Chief Justice.<9>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States#Size_of_the_Court
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dorkulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-30-09 06:35 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. My bad-- not the Pres, but Congress can.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
6. I'll say it early and I say it loud
Senator Al Franken is going to be one hell of a good Senator for the average Jane and Joe's. What's good for Jane and Joe is good for our country and that's a fact
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catshrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 09:22 AM
Response to Original message
7. Nicely done..very succinct description of judicial activism by the SC
Of course, the Sessions', Grassley's, etc. only call it judicial activism if it's not in favor of corporations or people like them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demoiselle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
8. Yes, indeed, Al. Wonderfully succinct and perfectly accurate. RAH! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CrownPrinceBandar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
9. Great statement by Senator Franken.....
I still can't believe I used to watch this guy on SNL. Thumbs up Mr. Senator!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Voice for Peace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
10. A truth-teller in congress, and a bold one
may very well help get a fire lit under the slowbutts and lamebutts
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JBoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
11. Solid. I expect to see some great things from Sen. Franken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
12. excellent!! kick and recommended!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
followthemoney Donating Member (745 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
13. Wow! A Democrat with more guts than excuses!
I didn't think that type was allowed anymore!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mucifer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. There are some great speeches in congress by progressive dems. You can see them on
cspan. But, if the news won't cover it, it's like it never happened. Makes me so angry. :mad:

Maybe they will be more likely to show some fiery Franken speeches because he's a celebrity, but I doubt it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
followthemoney Donating Member (745 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Thanks, mucifer. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cybergata Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-29-09 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
16. Thank you Minnesota for giving us Senator Franken n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC