HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Reports: FMR. AG Holder ...

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 08:53 AM

Reports: FMR. AG Holder says Next Democratic President Should Add Seats to the Supreme Court.

Former U.S. attorney general Eric Holder advocated for Supreme Court packing at a Yale Law National Security Group conversation Thursday afternoon, according to three students who attended the event. A Holder spokesperson Patrick Rodenbush later confirmed his statement to The Daily Beast.

The comment came when an audience member asked Holder to clarify his “when they go low, we kick them” comment made in October — a reference to Michelle Obama’s now famous line, “When they go low, we go high”. Holder answered that while civility is an important principle, Democrats are adverse to wielding power like Republicans have, according to Ramis Wadood LAW ’21, who attended the event. Holder went on to say that if he were president and had a Democratic majority in Congress, he would seriously consider adding two seats to the Supreme Court to make up for Mitch McConnell’s “power-grabbing antics” and his blocking of Merrick Garland’s confirmation, Wadood recalled.

Holder’s office did not respond to comment Thursday afternoon. Several audience members, including Wadood, are researchers for an initiative urging Democrats to expand federal courts called “Pack the Courts.”
https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2019/03/08/former-ag-holder-advocates-for-court-packing-at-yls-event/ *more at link*

12 replies, 968 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 12 replies Author Time Post
Reply Reports: FMR. AG Holder says Next Democratic President Should Add Seats to the Supreme Court. (Original post)
Stellar Mar 2019 OP
greymattermom Mar 2019 #1
Dennis Donovan Mar 2019 #2
dalton99a Mar 2019 #5
HAB911 Mar 2019 #3
dalton99a Mar 2019 #4
NewJeffCT Mar 2019 #6
pecosbob Mar 2019 #7
Stellar Mar 2019 #9
theboss Mar 2019 #12
Javaman Mar 2019 #8
Amishman Mar 2019 #10
KG Mar 2019 #11

Response to Stellar (Original post)

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 08:56 AM

1. This makes sense

because the country is so much bigger than it was when the constitution was written. It may have actually been their intent because they did not specify the number of members of the court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stellar (Original post)

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 08:56 AM

2. It's not just a good idea, it's a fair solution...

...to the extreme measures McConnell has taken to cheat Dems out of judgeships.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dennis Donovan (Reply #2)

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 11:03 AM

5. +1. We can't be timid when dealing with ruthless extremists

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stellar (Original post)

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 09:32 AM

3. K&R!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stellar (Original post)

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 11:01 AM

4. It's the only way to break the GOP stranglehold on any future Democratic president and Congress

Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stellar (Original post)

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 11:05 AM

6. Not just at the Supreme Court

add seats to the lower federal courts as well to combat the unprecedented tactics Republicans used to block nominees under Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stellar (Original post)

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 11:09 AM

7. Where are all the critics of this that populated recent threads about this idea?

I lauded this idea in recent threads and my comment was met with a chorus of 'bad idea', and 'will be abused by Repubs'. Now that former AG Holder floats the idea, nothing but crickets...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pecosbob (Reply #7)

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 12:08 PM

9. Now see, I thought it was a great idea...

and I thought that it would even fuel the GOTV, and I wondered what nay sayers thought too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pecosbob (Reply #7)

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 01:49 PM

12. It's an awful idea.

 

This ends with 121 Supreme Court Justices.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stellar (Original post)

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 11:30 AM

8. it would be interesting to watch the right wing heads explode and create whole new...

cabinet full of conspiracy theories.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stellar (Original post)

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 01:46 PM

10. No, I can't support this

It erases what remains of the independence of the court. It will become standard practice for each party to seize control of the judiciary when they take sufficient power. It guarantees the courts are always a rubber stamp of the ruling party. It sounds tempting with our control a near sure thing after 2020, but the long term ramifications are terrifying.

No, I won't support it at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stellar (Original post)

Fri Mar 8, 2019, 01:48 PM

11. been tried - by FDR as a get around

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread