Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Joe BidenCongratulations to our presumptive Democratic nominee, Joe Biden!
 

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Tue Apr 2, 2019, 08:47 AM Apr 2019

U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders against increasing number of Supreme Court justices


APRIL 1, 2019 / 5:28 PM / UPDATED 6 HOURS AGO

Ginger Gibson
3 MIN READ

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders is against expanding the nine-member Supreme Court, a proposal some liberal activists have advocated to effectively reverse President Donald Trump’s appointment of conservative judges.

“My worry is that the next time the Republicans are in power they will do the same thing, I think that is not the ultimate solution,” Sanders said in response to a question at a forum on Monday organized by public employee unions and other liberal groups.

Sanders said he would consider proposals that created term limits for Supreme Court justices or would rotate judges between the highest court and the lower-level appeals courts.

Trump has also ruled out expanding the number of judges ahead of the election.

more
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-sanders/u-s-senator-bernie-sanders-against-increasing-number-of-supreme-court-justices-idUSKCN1RD3AL

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders against increasing number of Supreme Court justices (Original Post) DonViejo Apr 2019 OP
Term-limits for SCOTUS is a far better solution. DetlefK Apr 2019 #1
Increasing the number of justices requires majority (now that filibuster's been killed). Amimnoch Apr 2019 #2
Doesn't the Constitution specify.that SCOTUS members serve for life? hedda_foil Apr 2019 #3
Of course he does. MrsCoffee Apr 2019 #4
 

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
1. Term-limits for SCOTUS is a far better solution.
Tue Apr 2, 2019, 09:00 AM
Apr 2019
If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Undecided
 

Amimnoch

(4,558 posts)
2. Increasing the number of justices requires majority (now that filibuster's been killed).
Tue Apr 2, 2019, 09:20 AM
Apr 2019

implementing term limits in any form will require a Constitutional amendment. There is no path at all to have the numbers in the Senate for at least the next 4 years that will give the 2/3rds requirement to make that happen.

More Justices are possible if we reclaim the Presidency, and get our Senate count to 50. Yes, if/when the Republicans get a majority in the Senate again, and the Presidency they will very likely return that favor.

Getting term limits put in place is not a possibility until at LEAST 2022. We would need to get 55 more seats in the house (or enough Republicans crossing over to hit that number-fat chance), and somehow gain 20 more seats in the Senate (or get enough Republicans to cross over- again fat chance). Even putting on my rose colored glasses, and looking at the 2020 senate and 2022 and 2024 Senate map, I don't see us getting anywhere close to gaining 20 senate seats from where we're at now, and losing none.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Undecided
 

hedda_foil

(16,373 posts)
3. Doesn't the Constitution specify.that SCOTUS members serve for life?
Tue Apr 2, 2019, 10:47 AM
Apr 2019

The idea was that it would shield justices from politics! if I'm remembering correctly term limits would take a constitutional amendment.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

MrsCoffee

(5,801 posts)
4. Of course he does.
Tue Apr 2, 2019, 10:50 AM
Apr 2019

Because the chances of a constitutional change happening are what?

Does everything have to be all or nothing?

I mean why make things better in the meantime.



If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Democratic Primaries»U.S. Senator Bernie Sande...