- 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
The Supreme Court should have an even number of justices so that it can be deadlocked
Posted on 9/21/25 at 6:47 pm
Posted on 9/21/25 at 6:47 pm
A deadlocked 4-4 Supreme Court (or whatever number) would force our worthless Congress and the States to work out momentous issues via Constitutional processes.
(Speaking of which: What a neat trick for Congress to hand over much of its work and hard decisions to the Judiciary)
Also:
- The first USSC was even, as the Founding Fathers intended
- Country altering decisions would require at least a 5-3 ‘super majority’ instead of one swing justice charting the path for the entire nation in a 5-4 decision
Maybe I’m wrong, so please explain your downvotes. Or don’t, I’m not your manager
(Speaking of which: What a neat trick for Congress to hand over much of its work and hard decisions to the Judiciary)
Also:
- The first USSC was even, as the Founding Fathers intended
- Country altering decisions would require at least a 5-3 ‘super majority’ instead of one swing justice charting the path for the entire nation in a 5-4 decision
Maybe I’m wrong, so please explain your downvotes. Or don’t, I’m not your manager
This post was edited on 9/21/25 at 6:56 pm
17
Posted on 9/21/25 at 6:57 pm to weagle1999
It specifically has an odd number to render decisions, not dreadlocks.
Posted on 9/21/25 at 6:59 pm to weagle1999
quote:
A deadlocked 4-4 Supreme Court (or whatever number) would force our worthless Congress and the States to work out momentous issues via Constitutional processes.
Also:
- The first USSC was even, as the Founding Fathers intended
- Country altering decisions would require at least a 5-3 ‘super majority’ instead of one swing justice charting the path for the entire nation in a 5-4 decision
Maybe I’m wrong, so please explain your downvotes. Or don’t, I’m not your manager
If the end result of 4-4 ties was to defer to Congress, then itd make sense. If a tie is just referring back to an earlier appellate court, then no it wouldnt make sense
Posted on 9/21/25 at 6:59 pm to Mobile Patriot
quote:
not dreadlocks
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:00 pm to weagle1999
Only Dems want to change the SC because they get their panties in a wad when the Court is more conservative.
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:01 pm to scottydoesntknow
quote:
If the end result of 4-4 ties was to defer to Congress, then itd make sense. If a tie is just referring back to an earlier appellate court, then no it wouldnt make sense
If it went back to the appellate level and we had conflicting districts I think Congress would be forced out of its stupor to act.
Or maybe not?
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:02 pm to weagle1999
If they are deadlocked then the lower court decision stands. Have seen what the lower courts have been doing lately?
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:02 pm to Kashmir
quote:
Only Dems want to change the SC because they get their panties in a wad when the Court is more conservative.
That is too binary I think.
I’m not a Dem and have thought this for some time.
Congress has ceded too much power to the Judiciary. The States should have more of a say.
This post was edited on 9/21/25 at 7:03 pm
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:03 pm to Mobile Patriot
quote:
It specifically has an odd number to render decisions, not dreadlocks.
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:03 pm to weagle1999
Your shitty takes are truly astounding.
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:04 pm to weagle1999
Make it 40!
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:04 pm to cajunandy
quote:
Have seen what the lower courts have been doing lately?
Again, that is a result of Congress (and the Executive).
Do y’all realize Congress could change the entire Judiciary branch tomorrow if it wanted to?
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:04 pm to weagle1999
I kind of like this. 
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:05 pm to TDTOM
quote:
Your shitty takes are truly astounding.
And yet the people who wrote our Constitution designated 6 Justices.
Why do you hate zombie James Madison?
This post was edited on 9/21/25 at 7:06 pm
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:05 pm to weagle1999
I would rather Congress be deadlocked. Like we need more laws?
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:07 pm to TigerBait1971
quote:
I would rather Congress be deadlocked.
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:07 pm to weagle1999
Do you have any idea what that would do? 
First off, the most frequent vote is 9-0. 99% of what SCOTUS does is obscure procedural law.
Secondly, it would basically be the end of the United States. All it would do is force the lower courts' rulings to stand... and in your scenario, often in conflict with each other
First off, the most frequent vote is 9-0. 99% of what SCOTUS does is obscure procedural law.
Secondly, it would basically be the end of the United States. All it would do is force the lower courts' rulings to stand... and in your scenario, often in conflict with each other
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:11 pm to weagle1999
quote:
Again, that is a result of Congress (and the Executive).
Again have seen what the lower courts have been doing?
If you want the lower court decision stand then you must be a Democrat.
What do you think congress needs to pass? Please be specific.
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:11 pm to weagle1999
quote:
If it went back to the appellate level and we had conflicting districts I think Congress would be forced out of its stupor to act.
Well I can promise you that every single issue is then going to end up with the opposite outcome of what you're hoping for.
Law needs to be as far removed from the democratic process as possible
Posted on 9/21/25 at 7:14 pm to cajunandy
quote:
If you want the lower court decision stand then you must be a Democra
If it wanted to, Congress could add 1000 new judges to any single district and obviate the influence of these single lower courts judges.
Or, they could quit rubber stamping nominations for PC reasons (that shithead Lindsey Graham).
This post was edited on 9/21/25 at 7:44 pm
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News