Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sender

Sarah can increase the number and pack the court when we elect her in 2012.


28 posted on 12/12/2010 11:55:29 AM PST by Gadsden1st
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: Gadsden1st

Sarah can increase the number and pack the court when we elect her in 2012.

And how on Earth will that happen? lol. They have to be willing to leave. They cannot be forced out by Sarah. Wow! Stunning how FREEPERS need to know the workings of the government.


58 posted on 12/12/2010 1:05:29 PM PST by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: Gadsden1st
Sarah can increase the number and pack the court when we elect her in 2012.

We would be better off reducing the court back to five as it was before Roosevelt raised it to nine and packed it. I'll pick the four to retire. You can trust me.

132 posted on 12/12/2010 4:23:28 PM PST by LoneRangerMassachusetts (The meek shall not inherit the Earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: Gadsden1st

1. I’m no Palin-hater, but she would most likely get slaughtered in a general election.

2. No Court-packing attempt would succeed.

3. No Court-packing attempt should even have to be made. For one thing, had Reagan and Bush the Elder not screwed up so royally with Kennedy (yeah he’s good on this issue...so far, but he’s unreliable overall) and Souter, we’d have 6 solid conservatives on the Court right now. But even more than that, the Sup Court should not have as much power as it has given itself. The Court was never intended to be a supreme policy maker, and it’s questionable how many of the Founders intended the Sup Court to be the final arbiter on Constitutional matters. Jefferson didn’t. And remember when anti-Federalist Brutus warned about what the Sup Court could become, Federalist Hamilton did not refute him by saying that ‘yes, Brutus is right about how much power the Constitution gives the Sup Court and that is what we intend’, but rather said the concerns and warnings were unfounded. Had the early Sup Court made the type of outrageous decisions they’ve routinely made for the last 60 years, then I seriously doubt that the early Presidents, Congresses, and State governments would have just meekly accepted them (or accepted the idea that they must obey them).

So that is the big problem; a federal judiciary with way too much power. Unfortunately we’ve been conditioned to accept judicial supremacy and the idea that the only way to undo a Sup Court decision is with an Amendment or later decision.

Breyer is a loathsome justice. He scorns legitimate rights while trying to invent new ones without a shred of Constitutional merit. In addition to his disregard for property and Second Amendment rights, he also apparently thinks that First Amendment speech rights should contain a loophole when it comes to insulting the Religion of Peace, as shown by his comments on the whole Koran-burning saga from a few months ago.


205 posted on 12/13/2010 7:38:23 AM PST by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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