Author Topic: Growing national, bipartisan movement for constitutional amendment to keep SCOTUS at 9 justices  (Read 789 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 381,863
  • Gender: Female
  • Let's Go Brandon!

Growing national, bipartisan movement for constitutional amendment to keep SCOTUS at 9 justices

Outside of Washington, D.C., there is broad bipartisan support to prevent court packing.



By Natalia Mittelstadt

Updated: April 23, 2021 - 11:24pm


Nationwide, a bipartisan majority of Americans are in favor of a constitutional amendment to keep the number of Supreme Court justices at nine, says Roman Buhler, executive director of Keep Nine, the movement leading the charge. However, the issue has become extremely partisan in Congress.

"The most fascinating thing has been the initial bipartisan support that we've gotten to the idea of keeping nine justices," Buhler told the John Solomon Reports podcast. "Our organization actually is led by a Democrat, a former state attorney general of Virginia. And it was originally proposed by a group of 15 former state attorneys general, a majority of whom were Democrat.

"And the Keep Nine Amendment, which says in its entirety, 'The Supreme Court of the United States shall be composed of nine justices,' was first introduced in Congress by a Democrat. So this is a bipartisan movement. Polling shows we have overwhelming support from the public, 62% in favor, only 18% against. Of those who have an opinion, overwhelming majorities of both Republicans and Democrats favor this amendment."

The politicians in D.C., however, see the issue in the usual binary, partisan terms.

more
https://justthenews.com/government/congress/growing-national-bipartisan-movement-constitutional-amendment-keep-scotus-9
Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Offline Sled Dog

  • The Ultimate Weapon: Freedom - I Won't
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,138
The Amendment should say not only that their should be no more than nine justices, but that federal judicial appointments are limited in term to be 18 years for the Supreme Court and nine years for lesser benches.

Life time appointments were a huge mistake in the original Constitution.
The GOP is not the party leadership.  The GOP is the party MEMBERSHIP.   The members need to kick the leaders out if they leaders are going the wrong way.  No coddling allowed.

Offline Fishrrman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,365
  • Gender: Male
  • Dumbest member of the forum
This will NEVER get through Congress.

The ONLY way to enact it would be through a convention of the states.

I disagree about the 18-year term limit.
Rather, there should be an "age limit" that mandates retirement.
72 years old sounds about right to me.

Offline Sled Dog

  • The Ultimate Weapon: Freedom - I Won't
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,138
This will NEVER get through Congress.

The ONLY way to enact it would be through a convention of the states.

I disagree about the 18-year term limit.
Rather, there should be an "age limit" that mandates retirement.
72 years old sounds about right to me.

There's a specific reason for the 18-year term limit.

It stops the practice of those charlatans in black skirts from playing politics with their presently voluntary retirement plans.

Nine justices, each with an 18 year term.  Stagger the end-of-term by two years, and ever Senate and Presidential election cycle there's a known vacancy in the court, so the political court suddenly and always comes under the political scrutiny of the voters.   That seat McTurtle kept open for Trump to fill was one of the campaign issues that drove his election win.   

With a known fill-by date, the confirmation process should take place and be finished no later than September of the election year, or held up by a Senate seeking political advantages the voters will see and participate in.   Suddenly the President Who Can't Ride a Bike's nomination of a latina claiming her big qualification for the court is that her vagina speaks to her in Spanish gets special attention from the electorate, and the possibility of another Bush-bot nominating another unqualified Harriet Meyers is reduced to near zero.

But most importantly of all, the court can no longer SURPRISE people with sudden vacancies that throw the political calendar into turmoil, unless we're fortunate and they die on us.  No controlling the wandering Pillow of Judicial Suffocation, as Scalia could tell us if he was still around. (Well, if he was still around, it would have been controlled, yes?)

And, finally, term-limits on those judges means they can take their arrogance and stuff it, we know when they're going to retire and start living under the rulings they make.
The GOP is not the party leadership.  The GOP is the party MEMBERSHIP.   The members need to kick the leaders out if they leaders are going the wrong way.  No coddling allowed.

Offline DB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,085
The Amendment should say not only that their should be no more than nine justices, but that federal judicial appointments are limited in term to be 18 years for the Supreme Court and nine years for lesser benches.

Life time appointments were a huge mistake in the original Constitution.

People on average didn't live nearly as long back then.

Offline Sled Dog

  • The Ultimate Weapon: Freedom - I Won't
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,138
People on average didn't live nearly as long back then.

Understood.

And the original intent of the Framers on the role of the Courts differed from what the Court usurped in Marbury v Madison, and 220 years later we are still waiting for Congress to address that usurpation with a Constitutional Amendment defining the Court's role officially and placing Constitutional limits on the Courts expanded powers.

Dredd Scot fueled the Civil War.  Wasn't the sole factor, but it put logs on the fire.

Plessy v Ferguson re-institutionalized racism.

The justices hold off on retiring and delay dying for political purposes.    They rule on what they feel (Ruth Buzzy wanted rulings based on extra-national laws, not the  Constitution, and she wasn't impeached).   They routinely ignore the letter of the Constitution and the intent, as well.

Term limits is the very least thing we need to do to begin reining in the Court.

I agree with Levin's recommendation that the States be allowed a 3/5 vote to overturn a bad court ruling, and that Congress be granted similar power, either of which could be applied, independently.   

Regardless, the Court has been out of control and unconstitutional for close to 90 years, now.  time to fix it.
The GOP is not the party leadership.  The GOP is the party MEMBERSHIP.   The members need to kick the leaders out if they leaders are going the wrong way.  No coddling allowed.