[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.

[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

[EagleUSA]

Democrats: SEDITION R’ US.

[confederatecarpetbag]

There is a solution for this. Trump immediately should nominate two additional Constitutionalists to increase the SC to 11 Justices. You know that’s what Dems will do should they (God forbid) ever regain power.

[goldstategop]

The crybabies want to undo the Trump legacy? Good luck with it.

They couldn’t even keep Gorsuch and Kavanaugh off the Court.

Morons.

[Reno89519]

Just wait and till Trump gets two or three more picks. It’s really no different than what everybody else said win the Liberals were in the majority. This seems to be a classic he said she said, very relative to whoever is in power, whoever is out of power.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

. . . and they will succeed, too - as long as the propaganda organs are united behind them.

But their hold on them is in fact illegitimate. It hinges on the homogenizing effect of the Associated Press in particular (and wire services generally).

People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations (1776)

Do MSM journalists “meet together” much? The AP “wire” is a continuous virtual meeting of all major US journalists - which hasn’t ever ended since its start before the Civil War. MSM journalists claim objectivity - and attack anyone who disagrees with them as “not objective, not a journalist.” Which notionally might seem to be OK - but journalists are negative towards society and naive towards government. And they certainly know that they are negative towards society - they learned that in journalism school (If it bleeds, it leads).

Negativity is not objectivity to anyone but a cynic. The wire services in general, but the AP in particular, must be sued into oblivion. When they were formed, their mission of economically disseminating the news made them “too big to fail.” In the 21th Century, conserving telegraphy bandwidth is worth bupkis. They are standing violations of the Sherman AntiTrust Act.

[\/\/ayne]

Wow, just lay it all out there, NY Slimes! Man!