Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-01-2020, 10:28 AM
Crane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,184

How would the public respond to SCOTUS appointment before Nov? Between Nov and Jan 2021?


I recognize there are lot's of variables, but McConnel has said he will fill a SCOTUS vacancy regardless of when it occurs.

Would there be a meaningful public outcry - people in the streets - marches on Washington? Or would it make the news for a couple of weeks and then be forgotten?
  #2  
Old 02-01-2020, 10:47 AM
BobLibDem is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 22,049
If the Democrats take the White House, the Senate, and McConnell's seat in November, and the vacancy occurs on Christmas, Republicans will rush through a right wing selection in the lame duck period. The public will shrug and some will say "well, both sides would have done it". Plus some would argue that black presidents are only entitled to 3/5 of a term.
  #3  
Old 02-01-2020, 12:50 PM
fedman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crane View Post
I recognize there are lot's of variables, but McConnel has said he will fill a SCOTUS vacancy regardless of when it occurs.

Would there be a meaningful public outcry - people in the streets - marches on Washington? Or would it make the news for a couple of weeks and then be forgotten?
Trump's base would have no problem with GOP hypocrisy--McConnell refused to hear confirmation when Obama submitted Gorsuch, saying wait until after election, but would do so for Trump
  #4  
Old 02-01-2020, 01:17 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 16,536
There'll be some protest but it won't amount to anything.
  #5  
Old 02-01-2020, 01:24 PM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 15,685
The Republicans will ram the judge through. The Democrats will be powerless.

Taking to the streets doesn’t solve Jack Shit and I’m tired of it. The Republicans would ram a judge though even if the Democrats win the presidency and win the Senate.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His
  #6  
Old 02-01-2020, 01:25 PM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 15,685
The Republicans will ram the judge through. The Democrats will be powerless.

Taking to the streets doesn’t solve Jack Shit and I’m tired of it. The Republicans would ram a judge through even if the Democrats win the presidency and win the Senate.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His
  #7  
Old 02-01-2020, 01:29 PM
2ManyTacos is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 980
Democratic Court-packing will become an inevitability. Right now it's only a likelier than not outcome.
  #8  
Old 02-01-2020, 02:02 PM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 15,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crane View Post
I recognize there are lot's of variables, but McConnel has said he will fill a SCOTUS vacancy regardless of when it occurs.

Would there be a meaningful public outcry - people in the streets - marches on Washington? Or would it make the news for a couple of weeks and then be forgotten?
And let’s face it. The USA doesn’t really do protests and really hasn’t since the 1960s. The Women’s March right after Trump was inaugurated was nice and helped motivate some people to get involved who were previously ‘Both are the same’ types. And, unseasonably warm weather throughout the country really helped turnout.

The not so recent protest I remember the most was the WTO protest where a bunch of a anarchists decided that smashing Starbucks windows was a way to destroy global capitalism. Capitalism is still here.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His
  #9  
Old 02-01-2020, 02:16 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,590
If replacing Thomas or one of the republicans, there will be protests and that sort of thing, but no biggie.

If replacing RBG or one of the liberal appointed judges, then there will be bigger protests, but still nothing to come of it.

Elections have consequences, which is something that needs to be learned by all of those who take our democracy for granted and waste their vote by either not voting, or by voting for a candidate with no chance to win.

Our democracy didn't fail because Trump got elected. Trump got elected because our democracy failed.
  #10  
Old 02-01-2020, 02:21 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 16,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
And let’s face it. The USA doesn’t really do protests and really hasn’t since the 1960s. The Women’s March right after Trump was inaugurated was nice and helped motivate some people to get involved who were previously ‘Both are the same’ types. And, unseasonably warm weather throughout the country really helped turnout.

The not so recent protest I remember the most was the WTO protest where a bunch of a anarchists decided that smashing Starbucks windows was a way to destroy global capitalism. Capitalism is still here.
In addition, no matter how intense the protest, the side being protested still has zero incentive to comply.

Imagine if 10 million Americans launched huge protests to bring back black slavery. No matter how intense, sincere and widespread the protests were, no presidency could cave in on something like that. (Extreme example, but you get my point)
  #11  
Old 02-01-2020, 02:27 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,590
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
And let’s face it. The USA doesn’t really do protests and really hasn’t since the 1960s. The Women’s March right after Trump was inaugurated was nice and helped motivate some people to get involved who were previously ‘Both are the same’ types. And, unseasonably warm weather throughout the country really helped turnout.

The not so recent protest I remember the most was the WTO protest where a bunch of a anarchists decided that smashing Starbucks windows was a way to destroy global capitalism. Capitalism is still here.
The media only covers protest is there is some sort of violence or other controversy.

This means that the only protests that most people ever hear about are the ones where violence or destruction were committed.
  #12  
Old 02-02-2020, 07:36 PM
fedman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ManyTacos View Post
Democratic Court-packing will become an inevitability. Right now it's only a likelier than not outcome.
where are the vacancies coming from for them to do 'court-packing"? Only Thomas and Ginsberg seem old enough to retire.
  #13  
Old 02-02-2020, 07:57 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 16,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by fedman View Post
where are the vacancies coming from for them to do 'court-packing"? Only Thomas and Ginsberg seem old enough to retire.
I think he means, the Democrats outright packing the Supreme Court. Like, expanding its size to 15 or 17.
  #14  
Old 02-02-2020, 08:34 PM
2ManyTacos is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
I think he means, the Democrats outright packing the Supreme Court. Like, expanding its size to 15 or 17.
This.

The alternative to Court-packing is jurisdiction stripping or just outright ignoring SCOTUS decisions. None are great options, but actually filling any vacancy this year will ensure eventual Democratic Court-packing, which is the easiest option.
  #15  
Old 02-03-2020, 12:08 AM
Projammer's Avatar
Projammer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SW Arkansas
Posts: 6,778
I've heard court packing thrown around quite a few times and I'm aware of what it means,

My question is, what's the procedure?

Does POTUS just pick up a pen one morning and jot on a post-it that the members of SCOTUS shalt be fifteen. No more. No less. Fifteen shalt be the number they shalt be, and the number of the members shalt be fifteen. Sixteen shalt they not be, nor either be they fourteen, excepting that that then proceed to fifteen. Seventeen is right out. Once the number fifteen, being the fifteenth number, be reached, then, begin they their deliberations.
  #16  
Old 02-03-2020, 04:20 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,777
"How would the public respond to SCOTUS appointment before Nov? Between Nov and Jan 2021?"

Broadly speaking there are three classes of voting citizen:
(a) Trump lovers. These will be delighted with anything the GOP does.
(b) Trump haters. They will hate it.
(c) The unwashed masses who decide our elections. Their reaction will be "Hunh? Wutz teh Spreem Cort?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ManyTacos View Post
Democratic Court-packing will become an inevitability. Right now it's only a likelier than not outcome.
Situation reversed, the GOP wouldn't hesitate.

But the Democrats are much too candy-ass to change the Court's size. I strongly doubt they could get even 35 votes for it, let alone 50.

Last edited by septimus; 02-03-2020 at 04:22 AM.
  #17  
Old 02-03-2020, 05:41 AM
Senegoid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Sunny California
Posts: 15,572
As others have noted, here on this Board and in the mass media, Trump & Co. have so overwhelmed the nation with their non-stop barrage of lies, scandals, outrages, and corruption, and the people of the nation are utterly exhausted. Nobody can even keep up with it -- not the media, not the people, not the courts.

So if they do as OP says, there will be a few scattered little protests and little more. The people are just too damn worn out to react more than that.
  #18  
Old 02-03-2020, 07:49 AM
BobLibDem is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 22,049
Democrats will not pack the court. Even FDR couldn't pull it off. Just because one party is crooked while in power does not imply that the other party would be too.
  #19  
Old 02-03-2020, 08:37 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Projammer View Post
I've heard court packing thrown around quite a few times and I'm aware of what it means,

My question is, what's the procedure?
Congress passes a bill changing the number of seats. That's it. Procedurally, it's very simple; the hurdles are all political.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 02-03-2020 at 08:41 AM.
  #20  
Old 02-03-2020, 08:48 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 20,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
Democrats will not pack the court. Even FDR couldn't pull it off. Just because one party is crooked while in power does not imply that the other party would be too.
You're right that the Ds are too candy-ass to do it.

But why do you think it's appropriate to bring Emily Post's Etiquette to a knife fight?
  #21  
Old 02-03-2020, 08:54 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ManyTacos View Post
The alternative to Court-packing is jurisdiction stripping or just outright ignoring SCOTUS decisions. None are great options, but actually filling any vacancy this year will ensure eventual Democratic Court-packing, which is the easiest option.
Jurisdiction-stripping might come back into vogue as a talking point, and there are also other creative ways for a vengeful political system to harass the court.

I'm not necessarily advocating for this, but Congress could, without packing the Supreme Court:

-Require a supermajority of justices to sign on to any particular ruling. For instance, a 5-4 or 6-3 ruling could be treated as a tie and default to the lower court's ruling (and politically, it's easier to pack the lower courts). This has an advantage in that it can be dressed up to sound like a Sensible Moderate Consensus-Building idea rather than a crazy radical idea. If it's good enough for the world's greatest deliberative body, the cooling saucer of democracy, it's good enough for the world's greatest court, you see.
-Diminish the court's ability to choose its own work by abolishing the certiorari process and making the court choose cases out of a bingo tumbler.
-Pressure justices to retire by making the job less cushy. Congress can't reduce their salaries, but they could ban them from receiving book royalties or speaking fees, ban them from going on all-expense-paid junkets, take away their clerks, make them sit 48 weeks a year, bring back circuit-riding, move the court to Nome, etc.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 02-03-2020 at 08:59 AM.
  #22  
Old 02-03-2020, 09:01 AM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 26,013
There are some Pandora’s box issues that shouldn’t be touched because of how it will go when the pendulum swings. I believe the Republicans opened a small one when they refused to have hearings and blocked Obama’s pick. It will inevitably lead to it happening to them when the roles are reversed.

Packing the court is a huge Pandora’s box that will not go well for either party that does it. As was noted FDR tried and realized the country would turn on him. There are no FDRs in the Democratic Party now. If a democrat congress rams that through things will not go well for them in the next election. I don’t see that happening at all.
  #23  
Old 02-03-2020, 09:39 AM
BobLibDem is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 22,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
You're right that the Ds are too candy-ass to do it.

But why do you think it's appropriate to bring Emily Post's Etiquette to a knife fight?
It's an ethical dilemma. Republicans are more successful at getting their agenda enacted than Democrats, because Republicans are willing to break long standing traditions, ethics, and the law when necessary. I don't expect Democrats to revive judicial appointment filibusters or blue slips when in power. In fact, I'd like them to kill the filibuster once and for all and with a Democratic House, Senate, and White House I expect them to undo all of this administration's works of Satan.
  #24  
Old 02-03-2020, 09:57 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
There are some Pandora’s box issues that shouldn’t be touched because of how it will go when the pendulum swings. I believe the Republicans opened a small one when they refused to have hearings and blocked Obama’s pick. It will inevitably lead to it happening to them when the roles are reversed.
You're right, but their choices would be to either have a Court majority some of the time, or none of the time.
Quote:
If a democrat congress rams that through things will not go well for them in the next election.
I doubt it would affect 2022 much at all. Either the Dems make things better in tangible ways for their less reliable voters, and they have some minor, no-big-deal, losses in the midterms, or they don't, in which case it'll be 2010 and 1994 all over again.

This is why the Dems need to be bold next year. Kill the filibuster, statehood for DC and (if they want it) PR, pack the court, and get shit done.

Last edited by RTFirefly; 02-03-2020 at 09:58 AM.
  #25  
Old 02-03-2020, 10:02 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,531
I should add that demographics are moving the Dems' way, but that only makes a difference if they (a) enable everyone to vote and have it count, and (b) give the less reliable voters in their coalition good reasons to turn out.

I believe a permanent Dem majority is within reach, IF the Dems are bold. But as long as they continue to be the Scared Rabbit Party, they'll continue to be ineffectual, and Mitch will continue to own them.
  #26  
Old 02-03-2020, 02:11 PM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 26,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
I should add that demographics are moving the Dems' way, but that only makes a difference if they (a) enable everyone to vote and have it count, and (b) give the less reliable voters in their coalition good reasons to turn out.

I believe a permanent Dem majority is within reach, IF the Dems are bold. But as long as they continue to be the Scared Rabbit Party, they'll continue to be ineffectual, and Mitch will continue to own them.
There will never be a permanent anything. Just ask the Whigs.
  #27  
Old 02-03-2020, 03:29 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loach View Post
There will never be a permanent anything. Just ask the Whigs.
OK then, long enough so that at such point the GOP gets back in power, it won't look anything like this GOP.

It's been maintaining its hold on power through voter suppression, gerrymandering, keeping the Dems from appointing judges and Justices to the Federal courts, the Electoral College, the filibuster, and changing the rules when they lose (e.g. changing the powers of the governor in multiple states after losing the governorship, and doing away with change via referendum).

If the Dems get into a position where they're able and willing to sweep all of this rule-by-artifice into the wastebasket, it's going to be hard for the GOP to get back into the game even with today's demographics. But people under 40, as a group, are a hell of a lot more liberal than the older generations, and they're starting to enter their prime voting years. And meanwhile the Fox News generation is aging into nursing homes and cemeteries.

The electorate of 2028 will be noticeably more liberal than the electorate of 2020 - and they'll vote Dem, as long as the Dems don't put them in a position of voting Green out of sheer frustration.
  #28  
Old 02-03-2020, 03:40 PM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
OK then, long enough so that at such point the GOP gets back in power, it won't look anything like this GOP.

It's been maintaining its hold on power through voter suppression, gerrymandering, keeping the Dems from appointing judges and Justices to the Federal courts, the Electoral College, the filibuster, and changing the rules when they lose (e.g. changing the powers of the governor in multiple states after losing the governorship, and doing away with change via referendum).

If the Dems get into a position where they're able and willing to sweep all of this rule-by-artifice into the wastebasket, it's going to be hard for the GOP to get back into the game even with today's demographics. But people under 40, as a group, are a hell of a lot more liberal than the older generations, and they're starting to enter their prime voting years. And meanwhile the Fox News generation is aging into nursing homes and cemeteries.

The electorate of 2028 will be noticeably more liberal than the electorate of 2020 - and they'll vote Dem, as long as the Dems don't put them in a position of voting Green out of sheer frustration.
Significant election reform is needed the second they take control of Congress. And it has to happen in a way that is obvious and recognizable as good by all and that repealing it will reflect too badly on Republicans for them to gain power again in our lifetimes. I know that sounds like a tall order but it can be done without constitutional amendments, and representation can be more fair and voting rights expanded in ways that not only will benefit voters overall but will be popular as well.

Opposing good electoral policies will make the Republicans look awful to the majority of voters. Seize the day, Dems.
  #29  
Old 02-03-2020, 04:10 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,730
How would the public respond to SCOTUS appointment before Nov? Between Nov and Jan 2021?

Simple. IOKIARDI. There are rules for Republicans, and different rules for Democrats. The Republican Party has made this plain and obvious, and the public seems to agree.
  #30  
Old 02-09-2020, 03:50 AM
davidm's Avatar
davidm is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Near Philadelphia PA, USA
Posts: 12,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Wiggler View Post
Significant election reform is needed the second they take control of Congress. And it has to happen in a way that is obvious and recognizable as good by all and that repealing it will reflect too badly on Republicans for them to gain power again in our lifetimes. I know that sounds like a tall order but it can be done without constitutional amendments, and representation can be more fair and voting rights expanded in ways that not only will benefit voters overall but will be popular as well.



Opposing good electoral policies will make the Republicans look awful to the majority of voters. Seize the day, Dems.
What can Congress do about the electoral college imbalance? That's not a rhetorical question; I'm genuinely curious if you have a workable idea.
__________________
Check out my t-shirt designs in Marketplace. https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...php?p=21131885
  #31  
Old 02-09-2020, 04:41 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm View Post
What can Congress do about the electoral college imbalance? That's not a rhetorical question; I'm genuinely curious if you have a workable idea.
That particular problem isn't really fixable by Congress. Increasing the size of the House is often proposed here, but while it might be a good idea on its own, it would do nearly nothing in the electoral college, where the big problem is caused by winner-take-all in large states, not by small states having more electors per capita.

The most it could do, I think, is officially approve of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, to head off one of the many legal arguments against it.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 02-09-2020 at 04:45 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:14 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017