USA Kamala Harris the 47th President of the United States - Hopefully.

[Geoff]

May have been asked - Apologies

Question
Under the US Supreme Courts presidential immunity decision could Harris (if she wins) abolish the Supreme Court Justices and re-establish a balanced panel without any impunity?



Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com

 

[blackshadow]

May have been asked - Apologies

Question
Under the US Supreme Courts presidential immunity decision could Harris (if she wins) abolish the Supreme Court Justices and re-establish a balanced panel without any impunity?



Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com

I don’t think she can get rid of the appointments but I believe there may be an avenue to expand the number of judges and then add extra appointments

 

[faible]

This shouldn't even be a close run thing

Because one candidate is a multi-time convicted felon?

 

[Bloods86]

Fox News polling now has Harris slightly ahead in Georgia, Arizona and Nevada marking big positive shifts from Biden-era polling. Trump has slight lead in North Carolina.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4852957-harris-cuts-trumps-lead-sun-belt-states/

 

[Bloods86]

Unsurprisingly, given Trump's disastrous economic agenda and his lack of respect for law & order / law enforcement, Harris has gained to within the margin of error over the economy and tied on crime according to Reuters/Ipsos.

Trump leads on immigration, though only 13% of respondents saw it as their top issue.

Harris has a lead over Trump on the issue of political extremism, in a completely unsurprising result, given it's...well... Trump.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4851331-kamala-harris-donald-trump-economy-crime-2024-survey/?tbref=hp

 

[GreyCrow]

I don’t think she can get rid of the appointments but I believe there may be an avenue to expand the number of judges and then add extra appointments

Can she set term limits? ie age limits or will the courts find it discriminatory

 

[Bloods86]

Can she set term limits? ie age limits or will the courts find it discriminatory

I think age/term limits might require constitutional amendment, but don't quote me.

I think the number of justices is open to interpretation though, and could be done. It would have to be 4 new appointees to shift the balance though, which seems a stretch. Maybe 2 and hope for a swing vote on some issues.

The key really is continuing to win presidential elections and hold the senate, as we've seen the Republicans abandon their duty in regards to Democratic nominees.

 

[faible]

Can she set term limits? ie age limits or will the courts find it discriminatory

Hasn't Biden introduced legislation about this?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I don’t think she can get rid of the appointments but I believe there may be an avenue to expand the number of judges and then add extra appointments

Yes I think you’re correct. Not sure what the upper limit is, but there was talk a while back that Biden could easily have ensured a Dem-friendly SC simply by just adding on a few more.

Guess he was just too decent to go down that road?

Seriously crap system.

American “democracy” LOL.

Nick Bryant’s book “The Forever War” has a lot in it about how US democracy is now decided by the completely undemocratic Supreme Court, and goes into great detail as to how it was originally intended as a very distant third branch of power - well behind the president and Congress - to be used mainly in a consultative fashion, (the so-called constitutional “originalists” are notably quiet on this fact!) and he shows how over the centuries, the Supreme Court has set about aggrandising itself relentlessly into a position of supreme power.

Great read if you’re looking for one.

 

[GreyCrow]

Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937,[1] frequently called the "court-packing plan",[2] was a legislative initiative proposed by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt to add more justices to the U.S. Supreme Court in order to obtain favorable rulings regarding New Deal legislation that the Court had ruled unconstitutional.[3] The central provision of the bill would have granted the president power to appoint an additional justice to the U.S. Supreme Court, up to a maximum of six, for every member of the court over the age of 70 years.

 

[Stokey]

May have been asked - Apologies

Question
Under the US Supreme Courts presidential immunity decision could Harris (if she wins) abolish the Supreme Court Justices and re-establish a balanced panel without any impunity?



Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com

Balanced. Lol.

 

[Bloods86]

Balanced. Lol.

Melanie Campbell. Lol.

 

[Stokey]

Melanie Campbell. Lol.

Strange pivot.

You guys cry about the constitution and democracy but are more that happy to trash it to get the result you want.

 

[Dazzler9]

Strange pivot.

You guys cry about the constitution and democracy but are more that happy to trash it to get the result you want.

Projection much.

 

[Stokey]

Projection much.

How?

It was only pure luck that Trump had 3 nominees during his term. Nothing unconstitutional was done.

Stacking the court because your side doesnt have the balance they require seems quite unconstitutional.

 

[Dazzler9]

How?

The whole trying to overturn an election thing. Remember that?

 

[Stokey]

The whole trying to overturn an election thing. Remember that?

What has the got to do with the Supreme Court.

Plus if I remember correctly Biden was sworn in when be should have been. Contrary to all the 'Trump will never leave office' hyateria that is still used in today's campaign like 2016 never happened.

 

[Dazzler9]

What has the got to do with the Supreme Court.

Plus if I remember correctly Biden was sworn in when be should have been. Contrary to all the 'Trump will never leave office' hyateria that is still used in today's campaign like 2016 never happened.

Nothing at all about the Supreme Court. I was simply responding to your statement. Please keep up.

Yep, Biden was sworn in. Everything hunky dory then. Let's just forget about the failed coup and attempted insurrection shall we?

 

[Gough]

Republicans refusing to confirm Obama's SC pick was just banter I guess.

 

[Not Important]

telling it as it is - succinctly



and there it is.

 

[Not Important]

yet there remain numpties out there who will still vote for this perilous certifiable asinine creature.

 

[Present Not Past]

Stalin purged the Soviet army of Generals and replaced them with Stalin friendly Generals.
Donald Trump likes this.
He wants to do the same to the United States Army.

 

[Mick F]

Nothing at all about the Supreme Court. I was simply responding to your statement. Please keep up.

Yep, Biden was sworn in. Everything hunky dory then. Let's just forget about the failed coup and attempted insurrection shall we?

There was no ‘hunky dory’ changeover. Trump refused transition privileges, offorded to a President-elect within hours of victory. Biden was not privy to intelligence briefings, nor incoming officials given access to government departments.

President-elect Biden’s team had been unable to talk to senior WH officials owing to Trump's refusal to trigger ascertainment - the formal process of commencing transition to a new administration - office space, meetings in government agencies, government funding etc. “Joe Biden's going to become president of the United States in the midst of an ongoing crisis. That has to be a seamless transition.” - Biden CoS Ron Klain

“Of course it would be better if we could start working with" the Biden team. "It's almost like passing a baton in a race -- you don't want to stop and then give it to somebody. You want to just essentially keep going. And that is what transition is."- Dr Anthony Fauci

 

[GreyCrow]

Cant hand over paperwork if its in your toilet

 

[Spearman]

telling it as it is - succinctly



and there it is.

and to tie it in with the SCOTUS, Trump's McConnell-assisted appointee Gorsuch once ruled that a company could fire an employee who didn't want to die on the job. A truck driver, still hauling in a sub-zero blizzard had an engine break-down on a deserted highway. There was no heat or supplies in the truck's cabin. So he bailed rather than freeze to death there. The company fired him. He appealed and Gorsuch ruled against him.