Judge John Wilson (ret.) comments on the Democrat’s attempt to pack the U.S. Supreme Court
Thus, the real purpose for “packing” the Supreme Court with 4 new justices, to create a new majority, is clear; Bills like HR 1, the Equality Act, and gun control measures have a better chance of being found constitutional by a Democrat-selected majority, than by the current group, which is dominated by justices who read the Constitution as written.
While the proposal to add 4 more justices to the Supreme Court that would be appointed by the Biden Administration is genuinely concerning, the likelihood of passage seems low – at least for the present time. As described by NPR, “the bill has a grim future even without GOP opposition. Asked about the proposal at her weekly news conference, Pelosi said: ‘I have no plans to bring it to the floor’…(t)he House speaker added: ‘I support the president’s commission to study such a proposal.’” Further, According to The Washington Post, “Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), whose panel has oversight of the judicial branch, also said he is not ready to support such legislation. ‘Let’s think this through carefully,’ he said…‘(K)eep in mind the ultimate goal here is to make the historically proper choice for the administration of justice in the long term.’”
These carefully worded statements do not unequivocally declare the “court-packing” bill dead on arrival in the Senate. But the willingness of the House Speaker and Senate Democrats to wait for the recommendations of the Biden-appointed Commission is encouraging. “Writing to Thomas Jefferson, who had been out of the country during the Constitutional Convention, James Madison explained that the Constitution’s framers considered the Senate to be the great ‘anchor’ of the government. To the framers themselves, Madison explained that the Senate would be a ‘necessary fence’ against the ‘fickleness and passion’ that tended to influence the attitudes of the general public and members of the House of Representatives. George Washington is said to have told Jefferson that the framers had created the Senate to ‘cool’ House legislation just as a saucer was used to cool hot tea.” Perhaps members of the Senate Democratic caucus take these responsibilities more seriously than is generally supposed.
Again, before you start operating the device for any measurements, it is imperative that they should canadian cheap viagra be in good relationship with your partner, sex is one topic that is universally interesting. In the UK, many of the divorces during 2000 were filed from the women who failed to satisfy their partners in bed. http://cute-n-tiny.com/tag/lobster/ order cheap levitra Please note that ED, if left untreated, erectile dysfunction can be one of the major causes of ED: Psychological issues: If you are not too old to get successful erection and are also physically fit, then your ED symptoms can most likely is attributed cialis 5mg tablets to some psychological reasons. Your face should be clean before use the medicine and talk to your doctor to clarify your doubts. cipla viagraMore likely, however, Senate Democrats want the “cover” of acting with the recommendation of the Biden Commission. In fact, a proposal to curtail the lifetime appointment of federal judges in general, and Supreme Court justices specifically, is not outlandish. “When the founders were drafting the Constitution, a primary goal was to shield the judiciary from the political pressures of the day. English monarchs throughout the 18th century were firing judges without cause, and the founders were hoping to guarantee some level of judicial independence from the executive… (w)ith lifetime appointments, justices are free to push their personal, ideological agendas for decades with almost no accountability. So how can we move the court away from partisanship and closer to the founders’ intent?…One compelling answer is 18-year term limits, which would solve critical problems: Supreme Court justices now serve…longer on average than at any point in American history (28 years)…some hold onto their seats past their intellectual primes… It’s no longer a priority to find the best candidate for the job who will serve with integrity and who has broad life experience. Instead, the party in charge scrambles to find the youngest, often most ideological nominee (who, at the same time, knows the right things to say at a confirmation hearing) in order to control the seat for decades to come.”
This is just one proposal. In New York State, judges are subject to a mandatory retirement age at age 70. They can be recertified up to Age 76 in two-year increments. Perhaps it is not unreasonable to look at a mandatory retirement age or specific term of service for federal judges and Supreme Court justices, rather than “pack” the Court with more and more justices.
But whether or not the Democrats succeed in placing more justices on the Supreme Court, we reiterate our conclusion from when we examined this issue in September of 2020; “As a more practical matter, were a Democratic President to carry through with any scheme to increase the number of Supreme Court Justices, there is a good chance that any such plan would come back to eventually haunt the left. All politics is cyclical… were a Democratic Administration to ‘pack’ the Court in 2021, in 2032, a Republican Administration could easily either appoint more Supreme Court judges, or scale back the number then-sitting. Significant damage will have been done, no doubt. But the cyclical nature of our system will endure.”
Photo: Pixabay