- 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
Schummer's threats of "packing the court" would require legislation signed by POTUS.
Posted on 9/22/20 at 4:52 pm
Posted on 9/22/20 at 4:52 pm
To change the judicial make up of the supreme court legislation would first have to pass the House with a simple majority.
Then once passed in the House, and assuming the filibuster is still in place the Senate would have to pass a cloture vote to bring the legislation to the floor of the Senate to vote up or down. The cloture vote requires 60 votes. After cloture the passage of the legislation on the Senate floor requires 50 +1 (I say 50 +1 because the +1 could be the VP or another senator).
Then POTUS would need to sign the legislation.
Now if Schummer is in control of the senate he would attempt to remove the filibuster however there is a big obstacle in his way. Cloture (or the filibuster itself...lol). He would not only need 60 votes to end cloture but he would need 67 senators present to end debate. That is a huge threshold for Schummer to overcome not counting the election threshold.
So in the final analysis Schummer's threat to pack the courts is for all practical purposes is a weak threat.
Posted on 9/22/20 at 5:13 pm to GumboPot
They can't just change Senate rules again?
Posted on 9/22/20 at 5:29 pm to GumboPot
The threat is to pack the court after a Biden win and Dems control both the House and Senate.
The problem is that the sitting SC would inevitably hear the case.
The problem is that the sitting SC would inevitably hear the case.
This post was edited on 9/22/20 at 5:36 pm
Posted on 9/22/20 at 5:32 pm to GumboPot
Wouldn't they have to amend the constitution? The strictest and hardest thing to do of all. 2/3 vote from both the house and senate. Or 2/3 of state legislatures can amend the US Constitution.
This post was edited on 9/22/20 at 5:33 pm
Posted on 9/22/20 at 5:33 pm to GumboPot
Trump should float the idea if packing the court of the GOP retains control just to watch the heads exploding.
This post was edited on 9/22/20 at 5:52 pm
Posted on 9/22/20 at 5:35 pm to viceman
The Constitution leaves it up to the Legislature for the SC's composition. The number of judges has been changed a few times.
Posted on 9/22/20 at 5:41 pm to viceman
quote:The Constitution does not set the number of justices.
Wouldn't they have to amend the constitution?
Posted on 9/22/20 at 5:41 pm to GeauxTrain
quote:'
The Constitution leaves it up to the Legislature for the SC's composition. The number of judges has been changed a few times.
Yes I just researched and learned that the constitution does not state the number of justices.
Posted on 9/22/20 at 5:43 pm to GumboPot
For all those on the left saying “honor her wish”, they don’t seem to care that RBG was against court packing.
Posted on 9/22/20 at 6:18 pm to GumboPot
They think they can never concede the election and wait until enough votes are counted for them to win.
Posted on 9/22/20 at 7:03 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
For all those on the left saying “honor her wish”, they don’t seem to care that RBG was against court packing.
And was for nominating a SC justice just 4 short years ago during an election year.
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News