Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

To: CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC

“Do you think they could get by with passing a law expanding SCOTUS, which at the same time prohibits any future changes to its size?”

No, they cannot do that without a Constitutional amendment, nor can they require a super-majority to change the law. It is well-established law that a current Congress cannot bind a subsequent Congress from repealing or altering a statute.


131 posted on 09/21/2020 7:06:45 PM PDT by CA Conservative (Texan by birth, Californian by circumstance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies ]


To: CA Conservative
"It is well-established law..."

That's the problem. Starting with the ultra-liberal Warren Court, many "well-established laws" were thrown under the bus.

Since the GOP's only short-term counter-move in the 1950s required an impossibly high threshold of 67 votes to impeach and remove, they just sat helplessly and watched one law after another being enacted by 9 unelected, life-termed men.

Are you absolutely confident that a 19-member SCOTUS with a Millennial Marxist majority a year from now will abide by the "well-established law" conventional wisdom?

140 posted on 09/21/2020 11:35:32 PM PDT by CardCarryingMember.VastRightWC ("May You Live in Interesting Times": Ancient Chinese Curse. The Wuhanic Plague: Modern Chinese Curse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson