Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

On a scale of 1-10, how important is the Supreme Court

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 » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
apples and oranges Donating Member (772 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:17 PM
Original message
On a scale of 1-10, how important is the Supreme Court
and nominations that will occur within the next few years?

This is not to scare anyone. I honestly want to know if people want to give that power to Perry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Syrinx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. at least 13
They've already doomed us with Citizens United.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rowdyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. Maybe a bit conservative....I'd say a 15
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
2. 11
Beyond the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nevergiveup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
3. 10
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
4. Perry's Fundraising got kicked up a notch with the citizens united decision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
5. Since justices appointed in 2013 will have veto power over any future progressive law for 30+ years,
I would love to hear the justification for rating it any lower than 10.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
6. On a scale of 1 to 10... 47. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MFrohike Donating Member (210 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
7. It's pretty important
The real problem is that, to some degree, it doesn't matter who is in office. The next vacancy will be someone from the Ivy League and most likely a federal appeals court judge. This has been a consistent trend for the last 30 years or so. Until that little cartel is broken, the decisions won't be terribly different for the economic health of the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
apples and oranges Donating Member (772 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Doesn't matter who makes the appointments???
Do you really think a republican would have made the same nominations?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MFrohike Donating Member (210 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. Let me explain
The only real difference would be over social issues. You would not see much difference over economic issues. The current justices just aren't interested in unloading the bad decisions of the Burger and Rehnquist eras. I don't have much hope for really changing the philosophy of the court until the candidate pool is enlarged past the current Ivy League/federal court bias.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Really? What happens if the next Supreme Court gradually overrules all the post New Deal precedents?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MFrohike Donating Member (210 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. That started in the 80s
It's an outgrowth of the resurgence of classical economics. Posner and the Chicago school have been enormously influential in all matters economic. Nothing will really change until someone finally stands up and points out that his ideas, specifically regarding antitrust, are ground in fantasy. Until that happens, don't expect much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #20
25. I don't think you understand. I am talking about the precedents that upheld Social Security,
Edited on Fri Aug-19-11 12:18 AM by BzaDem
Medicare, and the general authority government has to regulate the private economy. There is no current majority on the Supreme court to overrule those precedents. That will not necessarily be the case at all after 2013.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MFrohike Donating Member (210 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. Unlikely
The trend over the last 20 years or so has been to limit things like the commerce clause so that the overturning can be done in gradual fashion. I don't it see it being very likely that any court would attempt to radically change the powers of the federal government in one or a series of a few cases. That being said, I was stunned by the 2d amendment case and the overturning of Dr. Miles, so I have to admit anything is possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #27
36. I wish I could agree with you. Unfortunately, I have learned over the past several years that one
Edited on Fri Aug-19-11 09:54 AM by BzaDem
should never think that the Republicans won't use every ounce of power they physically have. I don't think we should plan an election strategy under the assumption that this is not the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Firebrand Gary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
8. 10. Does anyone think that we will see an appointment this year?
Edited on Thu Aug-18-11 11:25 PM by Firebrand Gary
Edited: I initially spelled ass rather than see. Oh my
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Not unless one of them dies
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Firebrand Gary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. I am greatly concerned over Ginsburg.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blkmusclmachine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:28 PM
Response to Original message
12. The Court's already busted:
That's why they closed out the Public entrance to the Court late last year/early this year. Only way to get in now is through a massive underground scanning depot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
14. it SHOULD scare people , this is why i don't consider anyone who claims the 2 parties are the same
and claims to be a liberal to be a true liberal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Golden Raisin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:35 PM
Response to Original message
15. 10+
Since they have already installed a President (Bush the Younger), they are extraordinarily important, particularly as they seem to have no compunctions about abrogating their Constitutional duties and place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iggo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:39 PM
Response to Original message
18. Ask Dubya. (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnorman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
19. In "normal" times, I'd give it a "3" or perhaps a "4".
But we haven't seen anything approaching, "normal since the year 1999!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Syrinx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-18-11 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. why would you do that?
The only way to overrule the Supreme Court is to pass a constitutional amendment. So I would think it is extremely important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MFrohike Donating Member (210 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #21
28. Not true
Not all Supreme Court decisions involve the constitutionality of an issue. The court has been overridden by a simple majority vote of Congress more than a few times.

Incidentally, by limiting appellate jurisdiction to cut out the Supreme court on a given issue, Congress could effectively remove them from most avenues of appeal on a certain statute.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
22. 10 plus...
Anyone who discounts the significance of letting a RWer choose the next few justices, is insane or just plain ignorant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demosincebirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
23. the senate has the last say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DFLforever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #23
26. Not on the constitutionality of a legal provision,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demosincebirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-11 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #26
37. So, the Supremes have the last say, not the people. I guess that's
why they are the "Supreme Court." I think that's a mistake the Founders made.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DFLforever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 12:14 AM
Response to Original message
24. 10
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 12:45 AM
Response to Original message
29. Like 45
Like I've said before, it doesn't matter what the constitution says, but rather how it is interpreted that truly decides things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 12:47 AM
Response to Original message
30. I do not want to give that power to any Republican.
That is why I am so worried that Obama is going to be our candidate.

I think Obama may not be able to pull it off in 2012. And I want to see a strong Democrat in the White House for four more years.

The best thing would be for him to get out with the people and then go back to D.C., fire a few of his aides and pull his administration together.

The other alternative is to draft a primary challenger.

Since I don't see Obama getting the courage to fire any of his staffers at this time, I figure we need to find a primary challenger -- precisely because we need to keep the White House blue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
global1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 01:20 AM
Response to Original message
31. In Most Respects It More Important Than The Presidency....
because a judge's term greatly outlasts the 8 years a person can be president. I say most respects because their is one important function that a president has and that is to - nominate and get a SC judge on the bench.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-11 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #31
40. +1! . . . . . . . n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 01:23 AM
Original message
If Ginsburg retires under a Republican, Roe v. Wade will be in serious danger.
So, 10.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU GrovelBot  Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 01:23 AM
Response to Original message
32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##



This week is our third quarter 2011 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

Click here to donate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
33. 120
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pansypoo53219 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 01:50 AM
Response to Original message
34. 100
we are within 1 member. this is why the SCOTUS APPOINTED georgee. TO PRESERVE ritard majority. nothing to do w/ law. & that is why kerry SUCKS even more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-11 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
35. Politically speaking: 10. Romantically speaking: 1. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Motown_Johnny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-11 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
38. undoubtedly a 10
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-11 02:12 PM
Response to Original message
39. The SCOTUS is as corrupt as the government. It's all a facade.
It's all in place to make sure the wealthy and corporations make more money. The SCOTUS ensures they do. It doesn't matter how important "we" believe it is. What matters is...it's NOT what it's suppose to be. They made that perfectly clear when they decided to appoint the idiot-in-chief as President.
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, 03:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion 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