Fyi:
Posted on 07/11/2022 10:53:24 AM PDT by redguyinabluestate
The town is full of hippies and socialists. Need help in freeping a poll.
The question is: Should the U.S. Supreme Court be expanded by adding additional justices?
Thank you
https://www.ptleader.com/stories/should-the-us-supreme-court-be-expanded-by-adding-additional-justices,84306?showpoll=1
I’m so happy to return, along with strong majorities in both houses of Congress. I’m also happy about all the unanimous democrat support for increasing the Supreme Court by 4 justices. I look forward to making those nominations soon after January 20, 2025.”
Took less time than typing your response. N0 - 82%.
If the Denialcrats want to do this, let them call for a convention of states and put a new number of Justices in as a constitutional amendment. And if they want abortion, same deal.
I suggest we table expanding the Supreme Court until 2024 to allow ourselves time for deliberate consideration.
Odd how the “yes” is tagged with “definitely”. Sort of like, if you don’t vote “ yes” you’re an idiot. 🤔😅
The PT Misleader is a socialist rag in a small village that thinks its cool because its beautiful place to live. I lived there for 25 years.
Its a S hole now and not at all surprising.
85%-15% 🤗
86% - No
“Crush the left, drive them before you, and hear the lamentations of their undefined birthing genders…”
Fyi:
The Supreme Court of the United States has had nine Justices since 1869.
Yes it is
Just a stray thought....Something must be done so there is never a tie......like a tenth judge (picked from a pool of 4) who is on standby and assumes the seat until a replacement is chosen.
No, it’s fine the way it is. 86% | 543 VOTES
Yes, definitely. 14% | 85 VOTES
The Supreme Court has indicated that most ordinary citizen voters should not find it difficult to interpret the Constitution.
“3. The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary as distinguished from technical meaning; where the intention is clear, there is no room for construction and no excuse for interpolation or addition.” —United States v. Sprague, 1931.
On the other hand, Thomas Jefferson had not only identified an unsurprising source of confusion concerning Court interpretations of the Constitution, but had also suggested a remedy for the problem.
"The Constitution on this hypothesis is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please." —Thomas Jefferson to Spencer Roane, 1819.
"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure." —Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 1823.
"In every event, I would rather construe so narrowly as to oblige the nation to amend, and thus declare what powers they would agree to yield, than too broadly, and indeed, so broadly as to enable the executive and the Senate to do things which the Constitution forbids." —Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793.
And constitutionally low-information voters arguably abuse their 17th Amendment power to vote for federal senators by electing senators who arguably don't know (blatantly ignore?) the federal government's constitutionally limited powers any better than the voters who elected them do, popularly elected senators then confirming new, anti-constitutional republic activist Supreme Court justices.
After all, pro-2nd Amendment (2A) citizens actually weaken their 2A protections when they elect senators who then help to pass unconstitutional federal gun control laws.
Insights welcome.
And speaking of elections, Trump's red tsunami of patriot supporters are reminded that they must vote twice this election year. Your first vote is to primary career RINO incumbents. Your second vote is to replace outgoing Democrats and RINOs with Trump-endorsed patriot candidates.
Again, insights welcome.
Why bother to vote by the time Biden and crew are done there won’t be a Supreme Court.
Au contraire. SC should be reduced to one justice...Clarence Thomas. He gets to eternally serve in this life AND the next life.
Should the U.S. Supreme Court be expanded by adding additional justices?
Posted Wednesday, July 6, 2022 11:16 am
No, it’s fine the way it is.. 87% | 605 VOTES
Yes, definitely................... 13% | 90 VOTES
There, did my fair share!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.