All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Thursday, September 06, 2018

Add more justices

Cable ratings went up this week as they broadcasted the Senate confirmation hearing on Supreme Court nominee live. The hearing had all the decorum and civility of last weekends funerals. The only thing missing was Bill Clinton ogling a singer's butt.

Michael Avenatti, lawyer to the porn stars, proposed Democrats elect him president in 2020 and add more justices to the Supreme Court.

In light of the Garland seat that was stolen, together with the events of today and the hiding of docs, etc., the court must be expanded to 11 seats after 2020. The Dem nominee must commit to this or not receive the nomination IMO. There is far too much at stake.

Certainly more nominations would help the cable guys.

A reader wrote, "Those who ignore history, yeta, yeta. The dimwits got rid of the filibuster of federal judges and McConnell upped the ante by doing the same to the Supreme Court. Now the democrats are paying the price.    

"Here’s a thought. If expanding the Supreme Court is such a lovely idea, why wait?  Why not have Trump go ahead and do it while he has a Republican Senate? He could add 2 fairly young conservative judges -- with the ability to read the plain language of the law — which would lock in a conservative majority on the courts for decades.   

"I wonder if there is enough water in the world to put out the burning hair of every Democrat in America if Trump were to suggest it."

Why stop at 11? Why not 15?

Oh wait. The Democratic porn lawyer just wants to pass laws as "rights" by 6-5 votes.

I just want the justices to apply the Constitution with an even hand by 11-4 votes.

17 comments:

  1. The "Porn Lawyer" hands Don "The John" Trump his a$$ regularly. Poor Mr. Dennison.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. By "his" I assume you mean Avanatti's, which Trump kicks regularly.

      Delete
    2. "The "Porn Lawyer" hands Don "The John" Trump his a$$ regularly. Poor Mr. Dennison."

      Avenatti's Twitter timeline reads like dispatches from the insane asylum. What's your handle so I can check you out on it?

      Delete
    3. Nony listens to the same radio station as Dan Rather.

      Kenneth, what is the frequency?

      Delete
  2. History illiterates don't know FDR already tried court packing and it backfired.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "He could add 2 fairly young conservative judges"

    Sounds easy enough. But an obvious problem with conservative judges is when they really aren't ... or if they are, they don't stay that way.

    The erratic O'Connor and the unreliable Kennedy were Reagan nominees. The execrable Souter was inflicted on us by Bush I. The ridiculous Stevens was courtesy of Ford. Just to name a few obvious examples.

    Perhaps the whole "lifetime appointment" thing is the problem. There should be a way to re-evaluate an employee who just isn't working out, or whose "best years" are clearly 'way behind him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've been saying term limits for the Federal bench as well as Congress for years.

      But I also think Trump is a better judge of people than Reagan or 41.

      Delete
  4. Ford, Reagan and Bush I needed 60 votes and may have been faced with a democrat Senate. I don't know. But Trump only needs 51 votes in a Republican controlled Senate. We should thank both reid and Mitch McConnell.

    ReplyDelete
  5. McConnell has been the right's best friend, really. I hope Trump gives him a majority he can easily exploit

    ReplyDelete
  6. We don't need a bigger Court and more judges. We need fewer laws and more humble judges who are more respectful of the other two branches of government. In his confirmation hearing, Kavanaugh spoke about the separation of powers, about checks and balances, referring to Federalist 51 as one of his favorites. On paper that's fine. But when was the last time a lower court judge got slapped down for ordering the president to do something, as if the judge were now the president? Despite the fancy words, the Judicial branch has managed to become self-governing, freeing itself from the other two branches of the federal government while encroaching on their Constitutional powers. These days judges not only tell Congress and the president what they cannot do, but what they must do. Congress has abdicated its Constitutional authority over the courts while the president can only respond to the courts if Congress is behind him, which is obviously not the case for this president.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is well said. Politicians are wary of taking responsibility for any action other than increased funding to benfit their reelection prospects. They are happy to have the courts take the heat for emotional social issues that could threaten their financial security but even happier when they can exploit them with out risk in their campaigns. They see no tangible reward for 'bravery'. In fact,They enjoy their judicial slavery and it's security so do nothing to threaten it. Trump's demand for action has been a royal pain in their lazy assess, upon which they had gotten used to sitting and posturing under Himself,the Bumster in Chief, Prince of Golf.

      Delete
  7. Indeed...
    https://amgreatness.com/2018/07/28/packing-and-unpacking-the-court/

    ReplyDelete
  8. Michel Avenatti, potential candidate for president! What a wild pre-primary season for the democrats. Like a steel cage match, only real.

    ReplyDelete
  9. We need electoral college votes for "next Court Justice" in non-Presidential elections whenever there is a vacancy or no "next Justice" already elected. That gives 9 Justices, plus a known "next Justice" who joins the Court whenever there's a vacancy.

    ReplyDelete
  10. “Cool and Unusual Punishment”, that’s what the country needs.

    ReplyDelete