Liberals Eye Far-Reaching Goal: Delegitimizing Supreme Court’s Conservative Majority

New York Times ^ | October 7, 2018 | CHARLIE SAVAGE

[Hadean]

WASHINGTON — The bitter partisan fury that engulfed Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation was the fiercest battle in a political war over the judiciary that has been steadily intensifying since the Senate rejected Judge Robert H. Bork in 1987.

But an even greater conflagration may be coming.

“This confirmation vote will not necessarily be the last word on Brett Kavanaugh serving a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court,” said Brian Fallon, executive director of the liberal group Demand Justice and the top spokesman for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Facing a Supreme Court controlled by five solidly conservative justices, liberals have already started to attack the legitimacy of the majority bloc and discussed ways to eventually undo its power without waiting for one of its members to retire or die.

Some have gone as far as proposing — if Democrats were to retake control of Congress and the White House in 2020 or after — expanding the number of justices on the court to pack it with liberals or trying to impeach, remove and replace Justice Kavanaugh.

[Williams]

Then they will be delegitimize. We already know their protestors include paid illegal aliens.

[dp0622]

Lol. Some here will worry about this for a year now :)

[Williams]

Yeah we’re really going to let them change the Supreme Court.

[PeteB570]

Why wait, lets expand it now and pack it with conservatives.

[ExTexasRedhead]

Sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that tends toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent towards, or resistance against lawful authority.

Is this what We The People will allow to happen to our Constitution and country by the Marxist RAT party? They must be defeated at the ballot box.

Get out the vote in November. MAGA 2018 and 2020

[MayflowerMadam]

“liberals have already started to attack the legitimacy of the majority bloc”

Of course, it’s legitimate if THEY have the majority bloc. They’re idiots.

[tomkat]

  .. tick .. tick .. tick ..

[Chickenhawk Warmonger]

Brian Fallon was one of Hillary’s henchmen during the 2016 election. This is his way of trying to payback Trump for beating the Queen. He is a snake and is funded by Soros. His organization was all over the sexual abuse allegations - probably more than we know. Interestingly the Chief Counsel for Demand Justice is Paige Herwig - former aide to none other than Diane “ChiFi” Feinstein. Never forget - there are NO coincidences with this crew.

[GOP Poet]

bookmark

[Flick Lives]

Some have gone as far as proposing — if Democrats were to retake control of Congress and the White House in 2020 or after — expanding the number of justices on the court to pack it with liberals or trying to impeach, remove and replace Justice Kavanaugh.

—

FDR, 1st President for life, attempted to pack the Supreme Court. For liberals, power is the law of the land.

[BobL]

I’m sure if a majority of the existing 9 members of the Court want it to be expanded, then Congress can expand it.

But if Congress wants to expand it only for political purposes, it’s difficult to see how that legislation can survive ‘judicial review’. Bummer for the Dems.

[Hugin]

[antidemoncrat]

The ultra left lost its chance for the one world Hillary dominated government and will do anything, including armed insurrection, to try to regain that.

[Rusty0604]

Strange New Respect for judicial minimalism. As Harvard Law Professor Adrian Vermeule remarked, “Law review editors: brace for a tidal wave of legal academic theories supporting judicial minimalism, Thayerianism, and strong — very strong — theories of precedent. Above all: the Court must do nothing without bipartisan agreement, otherwise it is illegitimate.” The past half-century’s enthusiasm for judicial activism will vanish, as legal academia turns on a dime to promote theories that will constrain the Court until a left-leaning majority returns, at which point they’ll turn on a dime again. ► New disrespect for the Court: The Supreme Court has not always been held in the high esteem it has enjoyed in recent decades. When it was blocking Progressive legislation and frustrating President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, it was derided as “nine old men,” and schemes to evade its rulings were widespread. Roosevelt even threatened to “pack” the Court with additional justices to ensure his policies were upheld. That effort failed, but a chastened Supreme Court started upholding New Deal programs immediately after, in what was called “the switch in time that saved nine.” If the Court shifts right as expected, you can also expect legal academia and the press, both of which lean very heavily to the left, to shift quite rapidly from near-worship of the Court to nonstop denigration. Some on the left are already talking openly of packing the Court with additional seats, as Roosevelt tried to, if they get back in power. Others are talking about impeaching Kavanaugh, because, well, of course. https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/10/07/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-confirmation-roe-gun-control-abortion-column/1557875002/

[bert]

Losers losing and inducing further losses

[Vendome]

Funny.

I printed that and hung above my desk at work as a message to the other salespeople who think I’m just lucky...

[alloysteel]

Armed insurrection, we can handle. But it would be a nightmare that would make the fictional “Purge” on TV look like a presentation by NPR.

Righteous anger, once released, is a difficult genie to put back into the bottle.

[EagleUSA]

Democrats: SEDITION R’ US.

[chiller]

Yes....let's go back to liberal majorities when it was 5-4 libs ...and void those decisions.

Further, we can dig a little deeper and expose all the fraud from Feinstein and Ford, which I think has already begun.