126
Supreme Court, for Now, Keeps Block on Revamped Biden Student Debt Plan
(www.nytimes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
126 points (97.7% liked)
politics
19089 readers
3863 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
We need to flip the house and pass the senate’s bill to expand the court. Screw these extremists.
13 federal circuits.
There should be 13 Supreme Court justices.
Each justice could be responsible as “executive” of their circuit.
12 associate justices for the 1st through 12th circuit.
The chief justice is assigned the Federal Appeals Circuit.
It makes way too much sense.
Your statement is the extremist view.
Just using the legislative process to do what has been done before.
“Your desire to push out the thugs grinding our government’s ability to grow and change to a halt is an extremest view” sure is a weirdo take, isn’t it?
It's kind of weird to think using the legislative process as the founders did is extreme.
And in four years just expand the court. And in four years just expand the court. What is your end game
I reiterate: It's kind of weird to think using the legislative process as the founders did is extreme. Why do I say that? Because the founders organized the Supreme Court via legislation.
If in four years a Republican-controlled House, Senate, and Executive branch want to expand the court via legislation, then that's their prerogative. And if four years after that, a Democrat-controlled House, Senate, and Executive branch want to do it again, that's fine.
There's nothing magical or mystical about nine members. Other developed countries have much larger Supreme Courts, which dilutes the ability of any one administration to shape it.
Until we come up with a way to uncorrupt the courts, sure. Currently, the SCOTUS is illegitimate.
You can’t change the number of justices on the Supreme Court.
Except that you can.
And they did. Eight times.
1789 - six justices
1801 - reduced to five justices
1802 - restored to six justices
1807 - seven justices
1836 - nine justices
1863 - ten justices
1866 - nine justices
1867 - eight justices
1869 - nine justices
Edgy take.
It's really not, compared to destroying the existing system.
TIL expansion is destruction.
Indeed.
Your trolling sucks, bro.
The fuck are you talking about?
NO U