It’s pretty much that any 4 SC justices can do this now, to preserve a lower courts opinion they agree with.
Right now there’s 6 conservative appointed justices, and three appointed by Dems.
So I don’t think it’s a coincidence they didn’t pull this out of their hat till they had enough so it only works for them.
They can do this with any lower court decision, and I don’t think the Dems will try to do anything about it, because then they’d have to admit they stood by and let the system get this corrupted.
This is like standing there watching an arsonist yell about how they’re gonna burn a house down for decades, watching them set everything up, burning your house down…
And then saying there was nothing to do.
Bare minimum we should have taken action when they stole Obama’s pick.
Instead the party let it happen thinking it would hurt Hillary if a SC seat wasn’t openly on the line.
It wasn’t as silly as thinking Republicans are holding anything back…
They told Obama he couldn’t pick a justice in his last year. Then four years later let trump pick a justice in his last year.
Republicans are going to keep cheating at every opportunity, I doubt there’s a single Republican politician that has an idea they think will work, but aren’t currently doing it because they think it’s morally wrong.
Hell, they do stuff constantly that they don’t think will work, just because they know there’s a significant period of time before anyone stops them, and it’s entirely possible no one even tries.
If there’s absolutely nothing to be done about the SC becoming more and more corrupt over decades…
At bare minimum Id like Dem politicians to openly admit it rather than continually denying reality.
One side only does what is explicitly allowed and has been done before, and one side will do anything even if it’s explicitly not allowed and has settled case law…
Which side do you expect to win?
Conservatives are willing to cheat to win, and Dems won’t even acknowledge conservatives are cheating.
How is sticking your head in the sand and hoping it goes away the best solution our party can come up with?
Edit:
Just to stop this conversation, they should have legally challenged Obama’s pick being stolen.
If they lost (which they wouldn’t have) because Obama only had one year left, then it would have been settled, and they could challenge when Trump did it in his last year.
We didn’t fight for Obama’s pick. So we couldn’t fight trumps pick.
Instead of any action, Dems picked to do nothing and let Republicans win both times.
Most people realize this is a bad strategy, at least by now. But most saw it coming long ago
Bare minimum we should have taken action when they stole Obama’s pick.
I’m complaining about decades of inaction
None of this addresses the question, do what? If the Republicans hold the White House or either branch of Congress there is nothing that can be done; at least no proactively, which leaves obstruction.
But that wouldn’t change anything, so what actions could they have taken and how? It’s really easy to say “do something” as long as it’s not on you to say what should be done and how it should be accomplished.
The Senate refused to confirm Garland, how do you seat a Supreme Court justice without the advice and consent of the Senate? Congress even refused to take a recess to block Obama’s ability to make recess appointments. The Republicans would leave a member behind to open and then adjourn.
So the question remains, do what? If you don’t have an answer then stop repeating that they should have done the thing that you can’t even think of.
Not deny Obama his appointment at the end of the term while allowing Trump to do that exact thing at the end of his term which is how they got a SCOTUS majority in the first place.
Not deny Obama his appointment at the end of the term while allowing Trump to do that exact thing at the end of his term which is how they got a SCOTUS majority in the first place.
Except the Dems didn’t do any of that. Do you have a method they could have employed to stop it? How is really the important part of the question.
Sure they did. They didn’t want to pick a fight with Republicans in 2016 when Obama nominated Garland because they figured Clinton would just do it after winning in 2016. In 2020 they once again sat idly by and allowed Trump to nominate ACB just 3 weeks before the election because they didn’t want to make waves.
I don’t get how people keep trying to claim Dems don’t have the power to do anything due to Republican opposition, while ignoring the fact that Republicans manage to pass their draconian bullshit in spite of Democratic opposition nearly every time. How come it only seems to work in one direction?
They didn’t want to pick a fight with Republicans in 2016 when Obama nominated Garland because they figured Clinton would just do it after winning in 2016.
What would that fight have looked like? Many prominent Dems spoke out against it. So what actions should have been taken. Could they have seated Garland somehow? Please stop with ambiguous statements like “fight”.
In 2020 they once again sat idly by and allowed Trump to nominate ACB just 3 weeks before the election because they didn’t want to make waves.
Many Dems again spoke out, pointing out the hypocrisy of not following their own “rule”. So again, what actions should they have taken? Could they have done something to stop ACB?
I don’t get how people keep trying to claim Dems don’t have the power to do anything…
Well, rather than being incredulous, maybe you could explain what Dems could have done, specifically of course.
…while ignoring the fact that Republicans manage to pass their draconian bullshit in spite of Democratic opposition nearly every time. How come it only seems to work in one direction?
Again, specifics would be helpful. But the Dems have stopped many Republican bills. But there are several differences. There’s a lot more Republican gerrymandering, so it’s easier for them to take the House. The Senate is inherently undemocratic, with representation being based on land and not people. California has as much representation in the Senate as Wyoming.
Additionally, Republicans don’t care if government functions. Their narrative is improved if government doesn’t work. They also govern for the fabulously wealthy and corporations, both of which will survive fine if the government doesn’t function.
Lastly, most of the Republicans most draconian legislation is passed at the state level or the result of SCOTUS decisions.
It’s pretty much that any 4 SC justices can do this now, to preserve a lower courts opinion they agree with.
Right now there’s 6 conservative appointed justices, and three appointed by Dems.
So I don’t think it’s a coincidence they didn’t pull this out of their hat till they had enough so it only works for them.
They can do this with any lower court decision, and I don’t think the Dems will try to do anything about it, because then they’d have to admit they stood by and let the system get this corrupted.
As opposed to doing what? Roadmap it for me, what should the Dems have done?
This is like standing there watching an arsonist yell about how they’re gonna burn a house down for decades, watching them set everything up, burning your house down…
And then saying there was nothing to do.
Bare minimum we should have taken action when they stole Obama’s pick.
Instead the party let it happen thinking it would hurt Hillary if a SC seat wasn’t openly on the line.
I’m complaining about decades of inaction
Yes but you’re still not specifying which actions were not taken, which is the hard part.
Biden could have supported the end of the filibuster and then packed the court.
This silly take needs to stop. If Biden started packing the court it would only set an unwanted precedent for future presidents.
It wasn’t as silly as thinking Republicans are holding anything back…
They told Obama he couldn’t pick a justice in his last year. Then four years later let trump pick a justice in his last year.
Republicans are going to keep cheating at every opportunity, I doubt there’s a single Republican politician that has an idea they think will work, but aren’t currently doing it because they think it’s morally wrong.
Hell, they do stuff constantly that they don’t think will work, just because they know there’s a significant period of time before anyone stops them, and it’s entirely possible no one even tries.
If there’s absolutely nothing to be done about the SC becoming more and more corrupt over decades…
At bare minimum Id like Dem politicians to openly admit it rather than continually denying reality.
One side only does what is explicitly allowed and has been done before, and one side will do anything even if it’s explicitly not allowed and has settled case law…
Which side do you expect to win?
Conservatives are willing to cheat to win, and Dems won’t even acknowledge conservatives are cheating.
How is sticking your head in the sand and hoping it goes away the best solution our party can come up with?
Edit:
Just to stop this conversation, they should have legally challenged Obama’s pick being stolen.
If they lost (which they wouldn’t have) because Obama only had one year left, then it would have been settled, and they could challenge when Trump did it in his last year.
We didn’t fight for Obama’s pick. So we couldn’t fight trumps pick.
Instead of any action, Dems picked to do nothing and let Republicans win both times.
Most people realize this is a bad strategy, at least by now. But most saw it coming long ago
None of this addresses the question, do what? If the Republicans hold the White House or either branch of Congress there is nothing that can be done; at least no proactively, which leaves obstruction.
But that wouldn’t change anything, so what actions could they have taken and how? It’s really easy to say “do something” as long as it’s not on you to say what should be done and how it should be accomplished.
The Senate refused to confirm Garland, how do you seat a Supreme Court justice without the advice and consent of the Senate? Congress even refused to take a recess to block Obama’s ability to make recess appointments. The Republicans would leave a member behind to open and then adjourn.
So the question remains, do what? If you don’t have an answer then stop repeating that they should have done the thing that you can’t even think of.
Not deny Obama his appointment at the end of the term while allowing Trump to do that exact thing at the end of his term which is how they got a SCOTUS majority in the first place.
Except the Dems didn’t do any of that. Do you have a method they could have employed to stop it? How is really the important part of the question.
Sure they did. They didn’t want to pick a fight with Republicans in 2016 when Obama nominated Garland because they figured Clinton would just do it after winning in 2016. In 2020 they once again sat idly by and allowed Trump to nominate ACB just 3 weeks before the election because they didn’t want to make waves.
I don’t get how people keep trying to claim Dems don’t have the power to do anything due to Republican opposition, while ignoring the fact that Republicans manage to pass their draconian bullshit in spite of Democratic opposition nearly every time. How come it only seems to work in one direction?
What would that fight have looked like? Many prominent Dems spoke out against it. So what actions should have been taken. Could they have seated Garland somehow? Please stop with ambiguous statements like “fight”.
Many Dems again spoke out, pointing out the hypocrisy of not following their own “rule”. So again, what actions should they have taken? Could they have done something to stop ACB?
Well, rather than being incredulous, maybe you could explain what Dems could have done, specifically of course.
Again, specifics would be helpful. But the Dems have stopped many Republican bills. But there are several differences. There’s a lot more Republican gerrymandering, so it’s easier for them to take the House. The Senate is inherently undemocratic, with representation being based on land and not people. California has as much representation in the Senate as Wyoming.
Additionally, Republicans don’t care if government functions. Their narrative is improved if government doesn’t work. They also govern for the fabulously wealthy and corporations, both of which will survive fine if the government doesn’t function.
Lastly, most of the Republicans most draconian legislation is passed at the state level or the result of SCOTUS decisions.