[rxsid]

"When SCOTUS has the opportunity to be viewed as a solution to a nationally perceived problem, is the point at which they will take up the question (in my opinion). I believe that they would rather do this, than do it too soon and be perceived as partisan (though we all know that they are)."

A good opinion (IMO). haha. The issue would have been waaayyy too much of a hot potato to touch early on. Now that things are changing (pun intended), it may not be so 'difficult' to address.

Doesn't make it right in light of defending our Constitution...but I can see how that 'argument' would be so.

On the other hand, if some/most of these cases, briefs, etc where never seen by the justices because of (alleged) subversion, then that's a whole different ball game (IMO).

[Habibi]

I would be interested in seeing a listing/presentation on this alleged “subversion”. Apparently, I’m well behind the power curve on this aspect, and need to catch up (understand that I would not be surprised that it is/was occurring). I would be interested in seeing a listing/presentation on these alleged allegations. If such information exists, could someone point me in the right direction?

Regards to all!