The USA: The Biden Years

Iguana

If I only could...
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
31,726
Location
Between war and denial
This isn't quite technically true. Whilst that's the rules at the moment, it's not in the constitution, so Congress could change things, by for example shrinking the court and then re-expanding it, giving the sitting president the ability to nominate the newly free slots.

The danger of course is anything the democrats do, the republicans will do so much worse the first change they get.
How can it not be technically true if that's the rules at the moment? :D
 

Iguana

If I only could...
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
31,726
Location
Between war and denial
"The number of Justices on the Supreme Court changed six times before settling at the present total of nine in 1869."

"Justice Samuel Chase is the only Supreme Court justice the House has impeached, and he was acquitted by the Senate in 1805."

So it's a pretty settled
 
Last edited:

ZenGiraffe

Dangerous Poetry
Joined
Apr 25, 2020
Messages
14,911
Location
San Marino
In the American context, this is really just the distinction between what is in the constitution and what is just Congressional law (is that a phrase?). That's why I was picking up on you saying that judges have a 'right'. Their position isn't necessarily as permanent as it appears, because of how much leeway Congress has to act if they so choose. Whereas if it was explicitly in the constitution, the process for change is much more challenging.

The UK, pretty much anything can be changed by simple majority, so yes parliament could abolish the monarchy of course, and we have very little protection of our rights from the Government of the day (see the British Bill of Rights), as opposed to having a written constitution with a higher bar for change.

What a BORING argument we're having.
 

RJN

Way fun!
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
15,407
Location
Atlanta
And also one vacancy opened up at the end of Obama's final term, but the Republican-led Senate refused to approve his appointment because it was so close to an election. Then the same thing happened at the end of Trump's term, but the Republican-led Senate had no problem approving his choice despite it being the same circumstances.

@RJN to correct me if I'm misremembering at all, ploise
True and evil
 

Madison

Everything goes up by six
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
65,283
Location
ex-European Union
And also one vacancy opened up at the end of Obama's final term, but the Republican-led Senate refused to approve his appointment because it was so close to an election. Then the same thing happened at the end of Trump's term, but the Republican-led Senate had no problem approving his choice despite it being the same circumstances.

@RJN to correct me if I'm misremembering at all, ploise
You are being too generous. Scalia died nine months before the election, RBG died only two months before the election.
 

Madison

Everything goes up by six
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
65,283
Location
ex-European Union
This isn't quite technically true. Whilst that's the rules at the moment, it's not in the constitution, so Congress could change things, by for example shrinking the court and then re-expanding it, giving the sitting president the ability to nominate the newly free slots.

The danger of course is anything the democrats do, the republicans will do so much worse the first change they get.
I don’t believe the constitution allows the congress to remove judges in this way. Have you seen something that suggests otherwise? Whilst the congress controls the size of the courts, the constitution seems clear to me that sitting judges can only be removed through impeachment.

(Although Ginny Thomas is doing her best to get her husband impeached).
 

POP!

Behind the velvet rope.
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
46,115
The Supreme Court is a lifetime appointment. The only thing that has really been up for debate is expanding the Court to make it less prone for one party controlling it. But that is basically a democrat pipe dream.
 

Madison

Everything goes up by six
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
65,283
Location
ex-European Union
They were very careful with their words, and in any case, you would need two-thirds of the senate to vote for conviction.
 

ZenGiraffe

Dangerous Poetry
Joined
Apr 25, 2020
Messages
14,911
Location
San Marino
I don’t believe the constitution allows the congress to remove judges in this way. Have you seen something that suggests otherwise? Whilst the congress controls the size of the courts, the constitution seems clear to me that sitting judges can only be removed through impeachment.

(Although Ginny Thomas is doing her best to get her husband impeached).
This is chat I remember from the time whenever Trump stole Obama's last nomination. The theory (since it wasn't tested) is that Congress could say there are three judges on the supreme court, and kick out the spares (presumably last in first out). I'm at work so don't have the time to find the original sources but I'll hunt them out later on
 

RaspberrySwirl

Leftover
Joined
Oct 30, 2004
Messages
30,619
The UK, pretty much anything can be changed by simple majority, so yes parliament could abolish the monarchy of course, and we have very little protection of our rights from the Government of the day (see the British Bill of Rights), as opposed to having a written constitution with a higher bar for change.

Is the monarchy not part of the constitution in UK? (I’m asking because it is here.)
 

VoR

Take it or leave it
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
120,364
Location
The Cinema
Apparently on Monday they’re expected to rule that US corporations don’t need to comply with climate change legislation/C02 caps, just in case you thought this venal shitshow wouldn’t affect the rest of us.

 

KindaCool

Afterlife
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
16,567
Location
Chicago
They're really milking it, huh.

Nothing is sadder than a country trying to recapture its past glory. Futile.
 

lolly

Rowena? From Kuwait?
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
164,558
I'm glad I'm likely to be dead within a few decades.
 

Rachey

A little bit lesbian
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
74,384
My god, what the hell is happening :(

How likely is it that being gay would become illegal in America then?
 

funky

User
Joined
Apr 30, 2004
Messages
87,890
I think in the future we’ll be asking that question in terms of USA or a Republican America, because based on the current trajectory the country can’t continue to exist as one entity. Trump has well and truly dug a line in the sand that is going to be incredibly difficult to undo.
 

POP!

Behind the velvet rope.
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
46,115
Don't tread on us (unless you're banning gay sex or female bodily autonomy) is the new USA slogan
 

Loufoque

BATTLE FOR YOUR LIFE
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
66,190
Location
Chromatica
Good Lord. How can California and New York remain in the same union with countries banning womens' and gay rights?
 

Diddy

愛してるって 言わなきゃ殺す
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Messages
64,370
Location
Osaka, Land of Fire
Hang on, so Biden’s new justice started on June 30th, who voted on Roe v Wade? I forgot how that vacancy opened, did someone retire?
 

bypass

User
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
897
I don't mean to sound melodramatic but it really feels like we are in a "calm before the storm" moment at the moment.

Historically what happens in the states has a richochet effect on the rest of the western world and as much as the state of things in the UK causes me undue stress, I would say developments stateside probably worry me just as much.

Are we fucked? :(
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom