Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I Think it's Time to Increase the Court From 9 to 15 Members

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-08 07:25 PM
Original message
I Think it's Time to Increase the Court From 9 to 15 Members
It wouldn't be the first time it was done. The number is not set by the Constitution.

It would sure be nice for Obama to appoint 6 new, young, LIBERAL justices next year. And maybe some of our older liberal justices would want to retire so he can appoint even more.

It could shift the court way to the left for a long long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-08 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'd support that.
Edited on Wed Jul-09-08 07:29 PM by Marr
Seven years ago I would've been against it because, while it may not be against the rules, it certainly seems like tweaking the rules unfairly.

The intervening years have proven to me that law is meaningless in this country, and great wealth observes no rules whatsoever in it's constant push for MORE. I think we need to take a similar stance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojambo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-08 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. It would NEVER fly with the current corporate media power structure in place. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
briv1016 Donating Member (407 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-08 07:38 PM
Response to Original message
3. I think that would be a bad president (sp?) to set.
Edited on Wed Jul-09-08 07:40 PM by briv1016
Each new president would want to increase the size of the court and before we know it there will be 100+ justices.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EV_Ares Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-08 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. Here you go; read this, shows Congress can do it if they want.
Size of the Court:

The United States Constitution does not specify the size of the Supreme Court; instead, Congress has the power to fix the number of Justices. Originally, the total number of Justices was set at six by the Judiciary Act of 1789. As the country grew geographically, the number of Justices steadily increased to correspond with the growing number of judicial circuits. The court was expanded to seven members in 1807, nine in 1837 and ten in 1863. In 1866, however, Congress wished to deny President Andrew Johnson any Supreme Court appointments, and therefore passed the Judicial Circuits Act, which provided that the next three Justices to retire would not be replaced; thus, the size of the Court would eventually reach seven by attrition. Consequently, one seat was removed in 1866 and a second in 1867. In the Circuit Judges Act of 1869, the number of Justices was again set at nine (the Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices), where it has remained ever since. President Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted to expand the Court (see Judiciary Reorganization Bill of 1937); his plan would have allowed the President to appoint one new, additional justice for every justice who reached the age of seventy but did not retire from the bench, until the Court reached a maximum size of fifteen justices. Ostensibly, this was to ease the burdens of the docket on the elderly judges, but it was widely believed that the President's actual purpose was to add Justices who would favor his New Deal policies, which had been regularly ruled unconstitutional by the Court. This plan, referred to often as the Court Packing Plan, failed in Congress. The Court, however, moved from its opposition to Roosevelt's New Deal programs, rendering the President's effort moot. In any case, Roosevelt's long tenure in the White House allowed him to appoint eight Justices to the Supreme Court (second only to George Washington) and promote one Associate Justice to Chief Justice.<7>

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-08 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Thanks! I'd read it before but didn't know where to find it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Journeyman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-08 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
5. FDR tried to do this in 1937. . .
the Judiciary Reorganization Bill was doomed before it was introduced. It probably wouldn't go far today, either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
exothermic Donating Member (570 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-08 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. And FDR is still hated by some even today for that.
They use the worst possible linguistic spin, "packing" the Court. I guess it's mostly older peeps but there are still quite a few of 'em around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-08 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
8. The further right the court goes, the more I'd welcome such ideas.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC