Biden recently stated he didn’t think an increased number of Supreme Court justices was the right way to go. I’m really not clear on his reasoning and I do believe your idea is one to consider.
Biden recently stated he didn’t think an increased number of Supreme Court justices was the right way to go. I’m really not clear on his reasoning and I do believe your idea is one to consider.
I am only speculating. But here goes. If Biden is to win next year and if we are to achieve victory in the way of significant majorities in the House and Senate, we need to choose our campaign subjects carefully. The only thing that matters - for democracy and the Planet itself, is defeating the fascists on election day.
That means that every statement by every politician is a campaign ad. Like it or not. Biden knows this better than anyone. He is a superior strategist.
I also believe in changing the Supreme Court. Term limits. Code of Conduct. Impeachment. And yes, a larger court. But there are 10 or 12 other items to be running on that are more apt to swing independent and youthful voters.
I speculate that Biden could shift his public pronouncements about the court in January 2025 after he takes the oath of office again.
Your comment is good political science not speculation. Perhaps one of these LFAA days, HCR will illuminate the post Civil War time when we had ten (10) Justices in this Country. First, Lincoln & Grant had to defeat the Seditionist Robert E Lee.
From your keyboard to God's eyes. The MAGA era has revealed the cracks in our country's underpinnings. There need to be additional qualifications specified for the office of President, senators, House representatives. Time to stop letting a small minority terrorize the rest of us. No more filibuster, equalize representation in the Senate. Wyoming should not have 2 senators for 500,000 plus people and D.C. have none. I do realize updating our governance will take years.
Jenn, ever since tfg ran and won* the presidency, I have thought that we need stricter rules (laws) about these things. For starters, if a person wants to run for president, they must pass a standard background check and qualify for a security clearance. It still makes me nauseous to think that tfg _and his family who did not qualify for security clearances_ had access to top secret information for 4 years, and beyond, since he stole our nations secret documents.
I think we've all been shocked by how many things we thought were laws & rules turned out to be only norms & guidelines. Who knew we needed an actual law for half the things TFG did? That's why "no precedence for xyz" has been so over-used... we never knew we needed to have laws to stop this behavior.
I am in disagreement with Biden on this issue. My hope is that when 2024 rolls around and he wins the nomination again, that he goes back on his word and starts the judicial process.
He has to win the general election first, and he needs enough Democrats in both houses to accomplish any changes to the Supreme Court. I don't believe this is something he can accomplish by executive order. If there aren't enough Dems to do it, he'd have to get buy-in from a few Republicans. But he can't begin that fight until after the election.
That statement tells me quite clearly he lives in some idealized world in his head, not the stark, ugly reality the rest of us live in. He can’t or won’t face reality (in multiple areas) and we, not him, live with the damage.
I am going to disagree. The strategy is to reinforce belief in the democracy for those who are rocked by the Trump agenda. To show what a reasonable president looks like who follows the rules as they are set in our democracy. Changing the rules smacks of dictatorship, which is what he does not want to appear by. I suspect there are a lot of Americans that will be swayed by the play by the rules attitude. Biden is still pitting himself as a contrast to what Trump has to offer, which is to not play by the rules, and to bend every governmental body to his every whim. It has worked thus far for him, so to suddenly become unreliable Joe, who goes after the wrongs by changing the rules might not work for him. He has Merrick Garland to do that. I am not saying he is perfect in everything he does, but as much as I wish to see him add to the courts, I can see how he is trying to appear fair and honorable, and that might call that into question, and give the right something to go after. In the short term we are going to be living with a lot of shitty, rulings, which the courts do not have the means to enforce if the President goes against them, but he will not. We have to be in this for the long game. That is get the Republicans out in 2024. The Supreme Court did help with this, because there is some time for Red states to get better districting, and get rid of some of the laws that make voting more difficult. That is the fight to take on right now. The Supreme Courts gave us an opening. We need to take that.
"*Reinforce* belief in democracy"? I've been skeptical about democracy since I realized there were few checks and balances on economic power. This was almost 10 years before Reagan was elected. The last 40+ years have proven me more right than I ever wanted to be.
On the whole I think President Biden is doing the best job anyone could do in the current situation, with such a narrow margin in the Senate, the GOP having gone to hell in a clown car, infrastructure crumbling from decades of neglect, and white supremacists out of the closet and armed to the teeth -- oh yeah, and climate change. If we manage to ride the current rapids and emerge reasonably intact on the other side, we as a country are going to have to come up with ways to rein in concentrated economic power so that it never again comes this close to undermining our progress toward real democracy.
I disagree with you. Time will tell which of us was closer to the mark.
In the meantime, there are quite a lot of people whose lives are now much worse because of those “shitty, rulings (sic)”. That’s hardly fair to them.
Relying on Garland to seek actual justice is akin to Biden seeing what’s happening with absolute clarity instead of the mindset that allows him to think the Court isn’t politicized yet, that McConnell is an honorable man and McCarthy is a good man (all things he has said publicly). Garland took exactly zero steps to holding trump accountable for the Jan 6th insurrection until forced to do so by the overwhelming evidence made public by the Committee hearings. He also gave trump months - months! - to return classified documents.
The danger is that this is not "short term." Unless those 6 conservative justices decide to resign, or they die (and none of them is in precarious health, as RBG was), they will be on the bench for decades. Decades. They'll be sitting on the court long after Biden dies.
Biden is doing the "turn the other cheek" thing, when he could be doing what is within his powers as president to do. He voices disappointment but leaves deeply harmful court rulings to continue the rot the GOP is feeding every day.
Yes. That is the danger. Still, I don't see him as turning the other cheek. He is playing the long game, which for a president means getting reelected. Then, he is able to do much more of what he wants. Still, he has to think of others too. Apparently this country, is dominated by conservative values. Even if the majority do not want to lose rights they have had, I don't see mass protests, a mass exodus out of this country either. It might be too late to turn things around, but think, Republican strategists have been planning this for a long time. Now we see it, we have to take time to react in the best possible way, knowing that the clock is ticking. I do believe that if Biden became an activist president more than he already is, he would not be reelected, and then anything he rammed in could be gone, and get worse in reaction to things that many are not ready for.
You sure don't know our President. Look at his track record. We have a very wise man and politician in the WH and one with integrity and a REAL patriot.
The right will scream "he's politicizing the court!!!!" no matter what he does, so he might as well do it. I do understand showing he's reasonable and normal, but not doing something because the right will complain is no way to govern. They're going to say whatever they need to, no matter how false or hypocritical, so we might as well actually get done what we can and show that our side is for progress and their side wants to repeal the 20th century.
Of course if, say, Thomas resigned and Biden proposed anyone to the left of him, even a hair, the GOP would scream he is "politicizing" the court. Witness the nomination of Merrick Garland. For the right, "politicizing" is the all-purpose cry for ANYTHING they don't like, right behind "but Hunter Biden's Laptop."
He cannot do it by executive order. He needs approval from Congress, and he cannot get it with the Republican majority in the House. He must be re-elected and have a Congress which will support it, but not this year.
Biden recently stated he didn’t think an increased number of Supreme Court justices was the right way to go. I’m really not clear on his reasoning and I do believe your idea is one to consider.
I am only speculating. But here goes. If Biden is to win next year and if we are to achieve victory in the way of significant majorities in the House and Senate, we need to choose our campaign subjects carefully. The only thing that matters - for democracy and the Planet itself, is defeating the fascists on election day.
That means that every statement by every politician is a campaign ad. Like it or not. Biden knows this better than anyone. He is a superior strategist.
I also believe in changing the Supreme Court. Term limits. Code of Conduct. Impeachment. And yes, a larger court. But there are 10 or 12 other items to be running on that are more apt to swing independent and youthful voters.
I speculate that Biden could shift his public pronouncements about the court in January 2025 after he takes the oath of office again.
Your comment is good political science not speculation. Perhaps one of these LFAA days, HCR will illuminate the post Civil War time when we had ten (10) Justices in this Country. First, Lincoln & Grant had to defeat the Seditionist Robert E Lee.
agree.
Well said.
If, by January 2025, Democrats have enough votes to expand the court, Biden will change his mind.
From your keyboard to God's eyes. The MAGA era has revealed the cracks in our country's underpinnings. There need to be additional qualifications specified for the office of President, senators, House representatives. Time to stop letting a small minority terrorize the rest of us. No more filibuster, equalize representation in the Senate. Wyoming should not have 2 senators for 500,000 plus people and D.C. have none. I do realize updating our governance will take years.
Jenn, ever since tfg ran and won* the presidency, I have thought that we need stricter rules (laws) about these things. For starters, if a person wants to run for president, they must pass a standard background check and qualify for a security clearance. It still makes me nauseous to think that tfg _and his family who did not qualify for security clearances_ had access to top secret information for 4 years, and beyond, since he stole our nations secret documents.
I think we've all been shocked by how many things we thought were laws & rules turned out to be only norms & guidelines. Who knew we needed an actual law for half the things TFG did? That's why "no precedence for xyz" has been so over-used... we never knew we needed to have laws to stop this behavior.
Yes Susan, a thousand times!
I certainly assumed that our founding principals were codified.
Apparently the Constitution isn't enough. Who do we see about that?
If we don't wind up with a republican President.
Not a chance. Come on.
I am in disagreement with Biden on this issue. My hope is that when 2024 rolls around and he wins the nomination again, that he goes back on his word and starts the judicial process.
He has to win the general election first, and he needs enough Democrats in both houses to accomplish any changes to the Supreme Court. I don't believe this is something he can accomplish by executive order. If there aren't enough Dems to do it, he'd have to get buy-in from a few Republicans. But he can't begin that fight until after the election.
He said doing so might politicize the court.
That statement tells me quite clearly he lives in some idealized world in his head, not the stark, ugly reality the rest of us live in. He can’t or won’t face reality (in multiple areas) and we, not him, live with the damage.
I am going to disagree. The strategy is to reinforce belief in the democracy for those who are rocked by the Trump agenda. To show what a reasonable president looks like who follows the rules as they are set in our democracy. Changing the rules smacks of dictatorship, which is what he does not want to appear by. I suspect there are a lot of Americans that will be swayed by the play by the rules attitude. Biden is still pitting himself as a contrast to what Trump has to offer, which is to not play by the rules, and to bend every governmental body to his every whim. It has worked thus far for him, so to suddenly become unreliable Joe, who goes after the wrongs by changing the rules might not work for him. He has Merrick Garland to do that. I am not saying he is perfect in everything he does, but as much as I wish to see him add to the courts, I can see how he is trying to appear fair and honorable, and that might call that into question, and give the right something to go after. In the short term we are going to be living with a lot of shitty, rulings, which the courts do not have the means to enforce if the President goes against them, but he will not. We have to be in this for the long game. That is get the Republicans out in 2024. The Supreme Court did help with this, because there is some time for Red states to get better districting, and get rid of some of the laws that make voting more difficult. That is the fight to take on right now. The Supreme Courts gave us an opening. We need to take that.
"*Reinforce* belief in democracy"? I've been skeptical about democracy since I realized there were few checks and balances on economic power. This was almost 10 years before Reagan was elected. The last 40+ years have proven me more right than I ever wanted to be.
On the whole I think President Biden is doing the best job anyone could do in the current situation, with such a narrow margin in the Senate, the GOP having gone to hell in a clown car, infrastructure crumbling from decades of neglect, and white supremacists out of the closet and armed to the teeth -- oh yeah, and climate change. If we manage to ride the current rapids and emerge reasonably intact on the other side, we as a country are going to have to come up with ways to rein in concentrated economic power so that it never again comes this close to undermining our progress toward real democracy.
I disagree with you. Time will tell which of us was closer to the mark.
In the meantime, there are quite a lot of people whose lives are now much worse because of those “shitty, rulings (sic)”. That’s hardly fair to them.
Relying on Garland to seek actual justice is akin to Biden seeing what’s happening with absolute clarity instead of the mindset that allows him to think the Court isn’t politicized yet, that McConnell is an honorable man and McCarthy is a good man (all things he has said publicly). Garland took exactly zero steps to holding trump accountable for the Jan 6th insurrection until forced to do so by the overwhelming evidence made public by the Committee hearings. He also gave trump months - months! - to return classified documents.
Neither one gives me “belief in the democracy”.
Of course we can agree to disagree. That is democracy!
The danger is that this is not "short term." Unless those 6 conservative justices decide to resign, or they die (and none of them is in precarious health, as RBG was), they will be on the bench for decades. Decades. They'll be sitting on the court long after Biden dies.
Biden is doing the "turn the other cheek" thing, when he could be doing what is within his powers as president to do. He voices disappointment but leaves deeply harmful court rulings to continue the rot the GOP is feeding every day.
Yes. That is the danger. Still, I don't see him as turning the other cheek. He is playing the long game, which for a president means getting reelected. Then, he is able to do much more of what he wants. Still, he has to think of others too. Apparently this country, is dominated by conservative values. Even if the majority do not want to lose rights they have had, I don't see mass protests, a mass exodus out of this country either. It might be too late to turn things around, but think, Republican strategists have been planning this for a long time. Now we see it, we have to take time to react in the best possible way, knowing that the clock is ticking. I do believe that if Biden became an activist president more than he already is, he would not be reelected, and then anything he rammed in could be gone, and get worse in reaction to things that many are not ready for.
You sure don't know our President. Look at his track record. We have a very wise man and politician in the WH and one with integrity and a REAL patriot.
The right will scream "he's politicizing the court!!!!" no matter what he does, so he might as well do it. I do understand showing he's reasonable and normal, but not doing something because the right will complain is no way to govern. They're going to say whatever they need to, no matter how false or hypocritical, so we might as well actually get done what we can and show that our side is for progress and their side wants to repeal the 20th century.
Of course if, say, Thomas resigned and Biden proposed anyone to the left of him, even a hair, the GOP would scream he is "politicizing" the court. Witness the nomination of Merrick Garland. For the right, "politicizing" is the all-purpose cry for ANYTHING they don't like, right behind "but Hunter Biden's Laptop."
Or scream "weaponizing!" Gads, what a ridiculous term.
Exactly!
He cannot do it by executive order. He needs approval from Congress, and he cannot get it with the Republican majority in the House. He must be re-elected and have a Congress which will support it, but not this year.
After he’s elected in 2024…….
You mean TFG? Not gonna happen. There are more of us than there are of them.
The court has always been politicized. This is nothing new.