•   
  •   
  •   

Politics 'Ideas Like That Are Toxic.' Why Democrats Are Split Over The Question Of Adding Two Justices To The Supreme Court

19:31  22 september  2020
19:31  22 september  2020 Source:   time.com

McConnell vows quick vote on next justice; Biden says wait

  McConnell vows quick vote on next justice; Biden says wait WASHINGTON (AP) — The death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg just six weeks before the election cast an immediate spotlight on the crucial high court vacancy, with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell quickly vowing to bring to a vote whoever President Donald Trump nominates. Democratic nominee Joe Biden vigorously disagreed, declaring that "voters should pick the president and the president should pick the justice to consider.” require(["medianetNativeAdOnArticle"], function (medianetNativeAdOnArticle) { medianetNativeAdOnArticle.getMedianetNativeAds(true); }); McConnell, who sets the calendar in the U.S.

So the Democrats are now thinking of trying to impeach President Donald Trump again, if he tries to push through a Supreme Court nominee this year. Given that he is obliged to fill such vacancies under Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, that’s like trying to impeach someone for doing their job properly.

Democratic candidates are increasingly advocating " court packing," that is , upping the number of Supreme Court justices to balance the bench -- or The idea is unlikely to succeed for historical and practical reasons but its resonance on the campaign trail reflects Democrats ' new emphasis on the

Even as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised that Democrats were willing to use “every arrow in our quiver” to prevent the Senate from confirming a replacement for the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, many mainstream Democrats were privately conceding that they have very little real procedural power.

Joe Biden wearing a suit and tie standing in front of a flag: At the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on Sept. 20, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden discussed the vacancy on the Supreme Court left by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death. © Roberto Schmidt—AFP/Getty Images At the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on Sept. 20, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden discussed the vacancy on the Supreme Court left by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death.

The smarter strategy for blocking a nomination, they argue, is to win back the White House and Senate by reframing the battle over filling the vacant Supreme Court seat as a question of access to health care. Ginsburg’s absence, after all, makes health care issues—including the future of the Affordable Care Act and access to abortion—suddenly salient to tens of millions of voters.

Is 8 enough? Court vacancy could roil possible election case

  Is 8 enough? Court vacancy could roil possible election case WASHINGTON (AP) — Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death has left the Supreme Court shorthanded during a polarizing presidential campaign in which President Donald Trump has already suggested he may not accept the outcome and the court could be called on to step in and decide the fate of the nation. It's the second time in four years that a justice has died during an election year, though that eight-justice court was not asked to referee any election disputes in 2016. Today, both sides have armies of lawyers ready to take the outcome to court.

Second , anyone put on a list like that under these circumstances – will be the subject of unrelenting Only after consulting Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. Senate – and seeking their advice As everyone knows – I have made it clear that my first choice for the Supreme Court will make history

Articles must be published within the last two weeks. More Info. Submissions must be from domains It looked like a spark went off in their minds as they stopped for a few seconds and realized that If the GOP pushes through a Supreme Court nominee before the election they will lose the Senate.

“A lot of the campaigns were already debating healthcare. But the risks of people’s healthcare just went from a policy concern in a think tank to a clear and present danger for families across the country,” says Democratic strategist Jesse Ferguson. “It’s no longer theoretical. It’s now an actual threat.”

Progressive Democrats, meanwhile, are forcing a different conversation. They say that if Republicans confirm a new justice between now and January—and Democrats win the Senate and White House in November—then Democrats must use their new power to add more justices to the Supreme Court, a strategy known as “court packing.” Their argument is that even threatening to pack the court may give pause to centrist Republicans who might otherwise push to confirm a new justice, while simultaneously motivating the Democratic base.

Fact check: Viral posts falsely claim Ruth Bader Ginsburg had already died

  Fact check: Viral posts falsely claim Ruth Bader Ginsburg had already died Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died Sept. 18, but some viral posts falsely claim she died up to 2 years ago.Ruth Bader Ginsburg reflects on being 'notorious' in first appearance since cancer treatment

Democrats have floated the idea of possibly adding additional justices to the high court or impeaching Attorney General Bill Barr as a means of “We should leave all options on the table, including the number of justices that are on the supreme court ,” Ocasio-Cortez said on Saturday.

Articles must be published within the last two weeks. It doesn't matter to republicans but that is why we ' re not republicans. This is to stop the Supreme Court nomination from proceeding. Impeach him, then keep sending the same articles over and over again if they refuse to hold a fair trial.

“When Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress,” Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey tweeted shortly after Ginsburg’s death, “we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court.”

But there’s the rub. Mainstream Democrats see the court-packing rhetoric as electoral suicide: it will, they argue, dissuade moderate and independent voters from voting blue in November. That kind of language benefits Republicans, says Republican donor Dan Eberhart. “It’s a gift,” he says. “Ideas like that are toxic to the very persuadable centrist voters both sides need.”

While both mainstream and progressive Democrats share the broader goal—to win in a landslide in November, in part by highlighting health care issues—the two camps’ strategies appear fundamentally at odds.

The majority of Democrats, including Presidential candidate Joe Biden, are squarely in the mainstream camp, arguing that Democrats’ electoral success lies in leveraging Americans’ anxiety over the current make-up of the Supreme Court by pointing at ways that a conservative bench might pass down rulings that negatively affect voters’ access to care.

Supreme Court is shorthanded but could play key role in election

  Supreme Court is shorthanded but could play key role in election The death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg adds a new layer of intrigue to a pandemic-infused election that's been challenged from Alabama to Wisconsin.On SCOTUS ‘all Democrats can do is plan retaliation’ expert says

Associate Justice Owen Roberts switched sides in “West Coast Hotel Company vs Parrish”, later jokingly referred to as The actual size of the court has changed over the years. Your question is just wishful thinking, though. Franklin Roosevelt tried to pack the court by adding additional justices .

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died Friday. He also pointed to the 2018 elections, when Republicans picked up two seats – although only a third of the chamber McConnell has lost just two Republican senators on the matter of voting on a Supreme Court nomination before the election: Alaska Sen.

A week after Election Day, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a case brought by a group of Republican Attorneys General, and backed by the Department of Justice, arguing the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional. Democrats say that in Ginsburg’s absence, the chances of the court siding with the Republicans increases significantly, and that millions of Americans could lose health insurance in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic that has infected over six million.

“In the middle of the worst global health crisis in living memory, Donald Trump is at the Supreme Court trying to strip health coverage away from tens of millions of families and to strip away the peace of mind from more than 100 million people with pre-existing conditions,” Biden said in Philadelphia on Sunday in his first remarks on the vacancy. “If he succeeds, insurers could once again discriminate or drop coverage completely for people living with preexisting conditions like asthma, diabetes, and cancer. And perhaps, most cruelly of all, if Donald Trump has his way, complications from COVID-19, like lung scarring and heart damage, could become the next deniable pre-existing condition.”

Fact check: Ruth Bader Ginsburg had 'mixed' record on tribal law, Native American sovereignty

  Fact check: Ruth Bader Ginsburg had 'mixed' record on tribal law, Native American sovereignty A post on Instagram claims Ruth Bader Ginsburg was "anti-Indian." That claim is missing context.Near miss renews call for Houston storm barrier

Right: Photo of the Supreme Court by Drew Angerer/Getty. If Democrats needed another reason to I've seen versions of Faris's argument appear in the socialist magazine Jacobin and all over my Twitter feed in If conservative justices on the court see this possibility developing, do you think they would

The death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has triggered an outpouring of condolences from leaders across the US political spectrum, as Tonight, the flags are flying at half staff over the Capitol to honor the patriotism of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Every woman and girl, and therefore

In an Instagram live interview on CNN on Monday, Democratic vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris—who, as a sitting Senator, could theoretically cast a vote for Ginsburg’s replacement, depending on when it occurs—had a similar message. “This is just not about ideology,” she told CNN political analyst April Ryan, noting the upcoming legal challenges for the Affordable Care Act. “There are going to be real, significant, very tangible differences in terms of the life and well being of the American people based on who gets elected in November.”

Biden, who has previously said he opposed the idea of court-packing, didn’t touch the subject in his remarks on Sunday. On Monday, both Biden and Harris declined to answer questions about it. “Its a legitimate question, but let me tell you why I’m not going to answer that question – because it will shift the focus,” Biden said in a local television interview on Tuesday in Wisconsin when asked about the prospect. “That’s what [Trump] wants, he never talks about the issue at hand and he always tries to change the subject. Let’s say I answer that question, then the whole debates going to be about what Biden said or didn’t say … the question should be about why he about why he is moving in a direction that’s totally inconsistent with what [the] founders wanted.”

Fact check: 'Kingdom of God' comment by SCOTUS contender Amy Coney Barrett is missing context in meme

  Fact check: 'Kingdom of God' comment by SCOTUS contender Amy Coney Barrett is missing context in meme A 2006 remark about the "Kingdom of God" is missing context in a meme that also falsely attributes views on ending separation of church and state. The widely cited reference to Barrett encouraging a “Kingdom of God” is taken out of context. Fact check: No guarantee Obama would've replaced Ginsburg with a progressive justice Amy Coney Barrett’s religious and judicial views Barrett is a conservative and a favorite among the religious right. Trump appointed Barrett to a be a federal appeals court judge in 2017, and she has since ruled in over 100 cases.

Campaigning on health care, Democratic strategists argue, is a tried-and-true strategy. In 2018, Democrats regained control of the House of Representatives largely by campaigning on protecting the Affordable Care Act, and 2020 has so far been similar. House Democratic incumbents and candidates have already spent a collective $30 million on television ads focused on health care this cycle.

Heath care issues tend to appeal not only to the Democratic base, but to independent voters and more moderate Republicans, particularly those who may have voted for Trump four years ago but subsequently soured on him. Internal polling from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee conducted this July and August in 57 congressional districts—41 of which voted for Trump in 2016—found messages on protecting people with preexisting conditions and cracking down on insurance companies to be most convincing.

Democratic strategists working on the most competitive Senate races, where Democratic candidates are running to unseat Republican incumbents, also argue that health care is a winning issue. “For Joni Ernst, Martha McSally, Steve Daines, the Affordable Care Act lawsuit is the last thing they want to talk about,” says one Democratic strategist working on Senate campaigns, referring to the incumbents in Iowa, Arizona and Montana. “If [Ginsburg’s replacement] is the deciding vote on repealing protections for preexisting conditions and Democrats can spend the next six weeks talking about it, then these folks are in a really big jam.”

Democrats eye expanding Supreme Court if Trump's nominee is confirmed

  Democrats eye expanding Supreme Court if Trump's nominee is confirmed Democrats are furious that Republicans may confirm a Supreme Court nominee ahead of the election.In 2016, Republicans in control of the Senate blocked President Obama's nominee to the court, Merrick Garland, from even receiving a hearing, leaving the Supreme Court with only eight justices for over a year. Now, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and other Republicans argue that the court must have nine justices ahead of the November election.

Progressive Democrats, meanwhile, have been beating the court-packing drum. Massachusetts Rep. Joe Kennedy, who recently unsuccessfully challenged Markey in a Senate primary as a centrist alternative, echoed his former competitor’s call to expand the Supreme Court. “If [Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell] holds a vote in 2020, we pack the court in 2021,” Kennedy tweeted Saturday. “Its that simple.” Other Democrats, like Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm and House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, have come out with similar declarations.

Progressive activists, who have long called for sweeping judicial reform, welcomed these endorsements. “These are things professors and others have talked about for years in terms of fixing our democracy, ranging from ending the filibuster to expanding the court to abolishing the electoral college,” says Rebecca Katz, a Democratic progressive strategist. “These are not academic issues anymore.”

Senate Democrats have so far refused to take the issue of court-packing off the table. On a Sept. 19 phone call, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer told his colleagues that if McConnell moved forward with a nomination and Democrats regain control of the White House and Senate, “nothing was off the table,” according to a source on the call.

Meanwhile, most mainstream Democrats appear to be quietly wishing that the court-packing discussion, which they see as potentially damaging, would just go away. “You’re never going to win having a process argument,” says the Democratic strategist working on Senate races. “Everyone knows someone living with a pre-existing condition. No one wants to sit down and have a process argument about the Supreme Court.”

A senior Democratic senate staffer, who requested anonymity to speak candidly, said focusing on court packing is simply galvanizing Republican voters. “It looks and sounds like exactly what [Republicans] are able to exercise their base about—rampant Democratic overreach on everything,” the staffer says. “Their base loves it and will eat it up.”

Fact check: It's true. Ginsburg and Scalia were close friends despite ideological differences

  Fact check: It's true. Ginsburg and Scalia were close friends despite ideological differences The "odd couple" of the Supreme Court disagreed on the bench but spent every New Year's Eve together.GPS Web Extra: Zarif on negotiating with US

—With reporting by Lissandra Villa


Video: Schumer: McConnell has 'defiled the Senate' by urging vote on Supreme Court nominee (NBC News)

Fact check: It's true. Ginsburg and Scalia were close friends despite ideological differences .
The "odd couple" of the Supreme Court disagreed on the bench but spent every New Year's Eve together.GPS Web Extra: Zarif on negotiating with US

usr: 3
This is interesting!