|
Replies: 17
| visibility 429
|
Orange Blooded [2693]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 3411
Joined: 7/3/07
|
We need to think big: not nine, not 12..we need 27 justices
Sep 22, 2020, 8:02 PM
|
|
think about the opportunities this creates. The court would be able to hear more cases, so we'd button up a ton more loose ends, plus we wouldn't have so much unnecessary chaos and division whenever a justice was appointed.
Also, we'd need to update the court building itself. Imagine a giant football field sized courtroom, with columns 100' high. If someone would put Trump's name on it somewhere, I'd bet we could get this done next year. We could build it somewhere near Lebanon Kansas to encourage all the libertarians to feel good about governance again.
https://time.com/5338689/supreme-court-packing/
|
|
|
|
 |
Oculus Spirit [93661]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95412
Joined: 12/25/09
|
After the pubs take back the house we are going to...
Sep 22, 2020, 8:15 PM
|
|
impeach every SCOTUS except Thomas who we'll keep because he's black. 
We will immediately nominate and seat 8 fundamental Christian evangelical pastors and their big haired wives to make a court of 17 so there will never be a tie.
Congress will then pass laws to establish that Christianity is the national religion and never again can anyone but Christian hold public office, blacks can't vote anymore and muslims, mormons and anyone who prays to anyone except the baby Jesus will be deported.
What I heard from you is just as idiotic as what you read in this post unless you're willing to go along with wall to wall SCOTUS confirmation votes between now and Nov 3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [57075]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 39680
Joined: 11/12/04
|
Just keep it at the one.
Sep 23, 2020, 12:28 AM
|
|
Constitution doesn’t say how many. Congress can set it to one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5673]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 12153
Joined: 9/28/08
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20540]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11683
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: We need to think big: not nine, not 12..we need 27 justices
Sep 22, 2020, 8:36 PM
|
|
I actually really like the idea.
We seriously have to de-politicize several aspects of our government as much as possible before we eat each other, and this is a good solution towards that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2693]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 3411
Joined: 7/3/07
|
Nine is such a shyatt number. 151 years has passed
Sep 22, 2020, 9:30 PM
|
|
since Congress established nine Justices on the court. Coincidentally, 1869 was the year football was first played when they actually used inflated pig bladders for the ball. I think enough time has passed, and we can safely advance the number of justices.
The framers and founders and everyone who was therein the early days would be horrified by what has transpired with the court. They never intended it to become a political body that votes in pacts, as it so often has for the last several decades.
"If we consider the number of cases decided by single vote majorities to be a fair proxy for a Court’s polarization, it becomes easy to see that our current Court is by and large the most partisan in years. In the period between 1801 and 1940, less than 2 percent of all the Supreme Court’s decisions were decided by a 5–4 vote. By contrast, the Rehnquist and Roberts Courts have seen just over 20 percent of their cases be decided by this small margin. This shift provides a clear indication that polarization has indeed spread to the judiciary."
--
https://stanfordpolitics.org/2016/01/07/troubling-partisanship-supreme-court/ The Troubling Partisanship of the Supreme Court | Stanford Politics ctober 12th marked the beginning of the latest high-stakes Supreme Court term. Among other cases, the Court is expected to hear challenges to affirmative action in higher education, abortion rights, and the power of labor unions. These cases are sure to produce highly contentious oral arguments and hundreds of pages of briefs. However, the realityRead More
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8982]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9781
Joined: 4/27/13
|
Re: We need to think big: not nine, not 12..we need 27 justices
Sep 22, 2020, 9:23 PM
|
|
they do need to be relocated , DC too swampy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155826]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65797
Joined: 5/6/13
|
I like it. Let's have three Presidents too, 150 Senators,
Sep 22, 2020, 10:23 PM
|
|
and 1305 House Representatives. Bigger government is always better, more efficient government.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2693]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 3411
Joined: 7/3/07
|
lol, that was one of Rogan's radical ideas***
Sep 22, 2020, 10:34 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155826]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65797
Joined: 5/6/13
|
There's one primary aspect I like about it.
Sep 22, 2020, 10:38 PM
|
|
You get to a certain critical mass, and it's impossible or too expensive for lobbyists to bribe enough people to get a favorable piece of legislature pushed through.
Additionally, we would be much, much more likely to slow our roll on progressive changes. There would be a much larger filter being applied which should help to table more of the dumb ideas and achieve a little more status quo.
Term limits would be mandatory though, or you'd just be creating a monster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24756]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42479
Joined: 7/31/10
|
You "roll" with filters...? Sounds like a waste... ;~)***
Sep 22, 2020, 10:59 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2693]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 3411
Joined: 7/3/07
|
for the court it makes sense since we are concerned
Sep 22, 2020, 11:18 PM
[ in reply to There's one primary aspect I like about it. ] |
|
with diffusing the partisan voting blocks.
The real reason I don't like the nine member panel is that it has been bad luck since the Council of Nine. To punish mankind, Zeus and eight other deities gathered to form the Council of Nine. The council members were Aphrodite, Apollo, Athena, Demeter, Hephaestus, Hera, Hermes, Poseidon and Zeus.
Together this council created Pandora, and sent her, as a gift, to Epimetheus. Epimetheus was also given Pandora's Box, and told to never open it. Curiosity got the better of Pandora and she opened the box, releasing all of the misfortunes of Mankind.
So there's a good reason right there to go with 27.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20540]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11683
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: I like it. Let's have three Presidents too, 150 Senators,
Sep 23, 2020, 6:57 AM
[ in reply to I like it. Let's have three Presidents too, 150 Senators, ] |
|
The "100 Senators" thing is actually a bit ridiculous. It's an anachronistic holdover because 100 seems like a magic number...but it doesn't work for us anymore and it's creating these entrenched voting blocs that are hardening and putting us at each other's throats over artificial divisions. Which blunts the effect groups like Problem Solvers - who make a real attempt at creating sensible legislation that works across the aisle - can actually have, since everybody's too busy voting party line instead of representing their own voters' actual interests.
It's even more ridiculous that states like Wyoming (population 578K) or Rhode Island (population 1 million) get the same two Senators as California (39.5 million) or Texas (29 million.) Yes, there's supposed to be a balance between small states and big states but this isn't balanced anymore, especially given the outsized role the Senate plays in confirming judges and government officials.
Our system is still stuck in "America 1.0", a lot of which were based on the limitations of communications technology of the late 1700's. We can do a lot better now...and we should. The only reason we don't do it is so a bunch of politicians can play power games at We The People's expense.
Our system needs an upgrade and an enema, and probably not in that order.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155826]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65797
Joined: 5/6/13
|
Where you see an anachronism, I see genius.***
Sep 23, 2020, 7:44 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83625]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63724
Joined: 12/31/06
|
isn't that why we have a bicameral legislative branch?
Sep 23, 2020, 9:20 AM
[ in reply to Re: I like it. Let's have three Presidents too, 150 Senators, ] |
|
One chamber is based on population and the other gives states equal representation. If you do away with the Senate model (along with the electoral college) we become more like pure democracy and mob rule. We are intentionally not a democracy.
Man, our Founders seem more and more like geniuses every day.
Our problem isn't the system, it's the people in the system. Honesty and integrity have become rare.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2693]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 3411
Joined: 7/3/07
|
I hate to burst your enthusiasm, but it wasn't genius.
Sep 23, 2020, 10:57 AM
|
|
The only reason it exists is because the small states staged a walkout, so they had to compromise or they wouldn't get a constitution.
The plan called for a legislature divided into two bodies (the Senate and the House of Representatives) with proportional representation. That is, each state’s representation in Congress would be based on its population. The alternative to the Virginia Plan, William Paterson’s New Jersey Plan, intended to give states equal representation in a one-bodied legislature. Adopted on July 16, 1787, the “Connecticut Compromise” utilized both forms of representation, providing proportional representation in the House and equal representation in the Senate.
So we've been stuck with a compromised bandaid solution for over 200 years. It has become the tyranny of the minority.
The ratio of population between the largest and the smallest states was “only” 12 to 1 when the Constitution was first adopted. Now it is 68 to 1. (California to Wyoming, in case you’re counting.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [46822]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30725
Joined: 8/11/15
|
You're missing the key to this that our founders
Sep 23, 2020, 10:06 AM
[ in reply to Re: I like it. Let's have three Presidents too, 150 Senators, ] |
|
saw and we decided to change.
Stop the popular election of senators.
Send it back to the states for the state legislatures to send.
No reason the people should vote for senators.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93661]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95412
Joined: 12/25/09
|
You're willing to sacrifice democracy?
Sep 23, 2020, 11:08 AM
|
|
You might be a communist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 17
| visibility 429
|
|
|
50
