Knowing full well that at least for the short term, and quite possibly at least a generation if Trump gets re-elected, Democrats are going to be on the short end of the stick when it comes to Supreme Court justices. That’s because the high court now has a 5-4 advantage for the conservatives, and there are possibly three justices that will be stepping down in the next five years. Clarence Thomas may retire sometime soon, especially if Trump wins re-election; Ruth Bader Ginsburg may either retire or die…most likely the latter, and Stephen Breyer isn’t a spring chicken either. That means that IF all three were to vacate their seats, Trump would end up with a total of FIVE Supreme Court nominees!
Believe it or not…that would not be the record. Don’t forget, George Washington nominated all of the Supreme Court as the first president…and Franklin Delano Roosevelt had nine nominations (all confirmed) in his 11 years in office.
But Democrats are trying to figure out a way to reverse this trend. That’s the one thing that no one can argue about the left…if they see themselves on the losing end, they want to change the rules. Well, they are looking to do that again.
Elizabeth Warren has said that the “Republicans ‘stole’ a Supreme Court seat, when they didn’t let Obama nominate Merrick Garland”. And then they “changed the rules by making the Supreme Court nominee only need 51 votes to get confirmed”. Actually, it was Harry Reid that started that second part when he changed the 60 vote rule to non-Supreme Court presidential appointees, so it would be easier to get Obama appointees to take office. Little did Harry realize that two could play at that game, and the 60 vote rule has pretty much been shelved for appointees.
Meanwhile, South Bend, Indiana mayor, Pete Buttigieg, has stated that he would like to see 15 Supreme Court justices…5 chosen by the Republicans, 5 chosen by the Democrats, and 5 that would rotate in and out on an annual basis from the appellate court system. Of course, there are many more liberal judges in the appellate system than on the Supreme Court, so Buttigieg would basically be tilting the playing field his way.
The problem with the Democrats is that Warren is wrong when she says that the Republicans “stole the seat” that Garland was nominated for. It was called politics, and Mitch McConnell played it like he was at the last table of the World Series of Poker. Obama was standing there with his male member in his hands. As far as the rule change that Warren talked about, she can blame that one on Harry Reid. When he made the move to get Obama’s appointments approved, he opened the door for the GOP. I seriously doubt Republicans would have done it with Supreme Court nominees had Reid kept the rule the way it was.
And as for Buttigieg, he needs to stop reading gay porn magazines and look at the Constitution because while there’s nothing that says you can’t change the number of justices on the high court (FDR wanted to increase the number and pack the court with his nominees to get his socialist ideas through); the idea of Republicans and Democrats choosing justices IS unconstitutional and wouldn’t fly. The president has the power to appoint justices to the Supreme Court “with the advice and consent” of the US Senate. Anything else is illegal.
Marco Rubio (R-Fl) is about to introduce a Constitutional Amendment that would limit Supreme Court justices to 9 members. Of course, as long as the Democrats have the House, that one won’t go anywhere…but I bet there would be enough states to go along with it, should the Republicans take back the House in 2020!
What the left needs to do is stop crying, and start doing their jobs. Stop whining and bitching about not having a “fair court”, and if you do your job well, the American people will thank you for it by electing more of your party. That’s the way it’s worked for 243 years.
Carry on world…you’re dismissed!