LOS ANGELES – President Biden on Saturday night said he expects the winner of this year’s presidential election will likely have the chance to fill two vacancies on the Supreme Court – a decision he warned would be “one of the scariest parts” if his Republican opponent, former President Donald Trump, is successful in his bid for a second term.

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Not quite.

    If you mean that all six conservatives could be impeached today, there really is only damning evidence against two of them right now and impeachment has to start in the Republican-controlled House and get a 2/3 vote in the Senate, none of which have a chance of happening.

    If you mean that Democrats could expand the Court to 15 today, that also has to go through the Republican House first, as well as centrist Democrats in both houses who might view that as too extreme. I am an advocate for expanding the Court, but I would stop at 13.

    • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      5 months ago

      I also think 13 is a good number because that would be 1 Supreme Court justice for each circuit court

      But getting to that will be hard and not to mention unless a cap is put in place (I prefer tying it to the number of circuit courts) then the next person who scoots in could expand it further with less push back due to it having been done just recently

      The last thing we need is every president who scoots into office appointing more and more justices until it gets out of hand

      • evatronic
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        5 months ago

        I think an “arms race” that forever expands the court – and thus dilutes the individual relevance of a single Justice – is a good thing.

        A single Justice dying or retiring should not be the sort of thing to reshape the entire country.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          5 months ago

          “A good thing” is too strong a statement, but I could agree with “not worse than the status quo.”

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        The way you do it is to - BOOM! - expand the Court to 13 on Day 1 of the next Biden administration, if Democrats also have both houses of Congress, nuking the Fillibuster if necessary, but delay it’s effect until September 2026.

        Then, go to Republicans and give them a choice. Either we can reform the SC and institute meaningful reform, or Republicans can watch Biden appoint four judges in their 40’s to lifetime appointments, and they can wait until they have the Presidency and both houses of Congress to make a tit-for-tat response. (Biden’s appointments would only be subject to those term limits if the amendment passes before he makes the appointment.)

        We can do a lot in an amendment, including instituting term limits, a firm code of ethics, a better process for confirmation where the Senate can’t just ignore an appointment, and formally fixing the size of the SCOTUS to match the number of appellate courts.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Democrats are never as good at predicting something as they are when they are predicting the things they cannot accomplish