- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Should Trump Look at increasing the size of the Supreme Court?
Posted on 11/9/16 at 3:29 pm
Posted on 11/9/16 at 3:29 pm
Should Trump look to increase the size of the Supreme Court to 13 members? The Supreme Court is essentially overwhelmed by its work load. Consequently, the Federal Circuit makes a ton of law that is flat out wrong and doesn't get corrected, especially in crucial intellectual property cases. Should Trump look to give the high court some reinforcements so that it can increase its workload?
This post was edited on 11/9/16 at 3:39 pm
2
Posted on 11/9/16 at 3:32 pm to therick711
Can't be done. FDR added justices to get the New Deal through the Court. Congress was quick to close the loophole afterwards. The number of justices is set by law now.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 3:33 pm to TheTideMustRoll
I don't there is a requirement for us to have 9 justices?
Personally I want it to stay at 8.
Personally I want it to stay at 8.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 3:35 pm to TheTideMustRoll
quote:
Can't be done. FDR added justices to get the New Deal through the Court. Congress was quick to close the loophole afterwards. The number of justices is set by law now.
No offense, but this is basically all wrong. The size of the court has always been set by Congress. FDR wanted to add members to the court in the wake of new deal programs being declared unconstitutional. His plan did not make it out of congress and into law. Congress still has the ability to change the size of the Court.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 3:37 pm to weagle99
No, but see if Kennedy & Thomas want to retire. Along with the newly appointed Justice, Alito, & Roberts, that gives the Conservatives 5 young justices and solidifies the court for a while. And that is not even counting if Ginsberg retires.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 3:44 pm to therick711
I would prefer an even number - eliminate one vote decisions - need some degree of super majority to rule on constitutionality.
I would like to see something approaching unanimity.
It's either constitutional or it's not. Need justices who can tell the difference - it shouldn't be all that hard. Just eliminate all the "what do the people think/want/need" influences from the court's docket. Those are decisions for the congress, not the interpreter of law.
Maybe requite 'fewer that 2 votes in dissent."
I would like to see something approaching unanimity.
It's either constitutional or it's not. Need justices who can tell the difference - it shouldn't be all that hard. Just eliminate all the "what do the people think/want/need" influences from the court's docket. Those are decisions for the congress, not the interpreter of law.
Maybe requite 'fewer that 2 votes in dissent."
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News