Posted on 10/12/2020 10:18:46 AM PDT by Red Badger
MSNBC host Joe Scarborough asked Senate Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer on Monday why the Democrats couldn’t complete the work of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) and “add a couple of justices” to the Supreme Court of the United States.
“Why can’t Democrats Constitutionally finish what FDR started back over 80 years ago and add a couple of justices in response to Republican radicalism?” Scarborough asked Schumer on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”
Roosevelt threatened to enlarge the Supreme Court when the body initially opposed his New Deal legislation.
“It’s Constitutional. And by [Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell’s standard, you would be … in your right to do that, correct?” Scarborough asked. (RELATED: Democrats Threaten To Pack The Court If Republicans Nominate A Replacement For Ginsburg This Year)
Scarborough and Schumer were discussing the decision by President Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Senate to move forward with the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to fill the vacant seat on the court following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Scarborough suggested that Republican Kentucky Sen. McConnell was being hypocritical in supporting Barrett’s nomination when he refused to consider former President Barack Obama’s last nominee, Merrick Garland. Scarborough said at the time that McConnell was wrong to block Garland’s confirmation.
Schumer agreed with Scarborough: “We would certainly be in the Constitutional right to do it,” while accusing Barrett of planning “to take away” Americans’ health care and to “repeal Roe V. Wade,” the landmark court decision that legalized abortion in the United States.
The Democratic New York senator suggested that 71% of Americans are opposed to that repeal while also suggesting that confirming Barrett “could turn the court into something that would get rid of all labor unions [and] make America a right-to-work state … ”
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden said Friday that he didn’t believe voters deserved to know what his position is on potentially packing the court.
Despite frequent queries, the former vice president has repeatedly refused to state his position, suggesting the issue of packing the court is a Republican distraction and that he doesn’t want to “play the president’s game.” (RELATED: Here Are 7 Times Biden And Harris Have Refused To Say Where They Stand On Court Packing)
Although Democratic Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono called court packing “long overdue court reform,” Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin has opposed the policy.
I just had a moment like the diner scene in When Harry Met Sally.
Joe, that idea is deader than the intern in your office.
If Trump is re-elected with a Republican Senate, would they be so enthusiastic about packing the court if Trump did it?
He has stones? Who Knew?
Just imagine President Trump introducing the guests in the front row at his 2021 inauguration: six new Supreme Court nominees.
Where is chief justice of the supreme court john roberts on defending a "no political bias" court system?
It would be seen as nakedly political.
Democrats fought against FDR’s “court-packing” almost as hard as prior Democrats blocked the abolition of slavery.
Key question to ask...why stop at 15? Why not 21 or 37? I will admit...somewhere down the line over the past hundred years...some text should have been added to the Supreme Court to indicate a number of some type.
I think a lot of people now (both sides of the aisle) would agree to a retirement age stipulation for the judges.
Never saw the movie, so I don’t know....................
As I understand it, it never worked out too well for FDR. The Dems lost massively in the following congressional elections. after trying and failing to carry out that dastardly maneuver.
Normalization. Just finishing the work of the great FDR. It will be a great thing to get that unfinished business done.
Ya’ll can write him off
I think FDR just used the ‘threat’ as a bludgeon to get the Supremes to vote ‘his way’ or else..................
Going over his pocket copy of “How to Implement unConstitutonal
Law from the Bench”.
Page One
Paragraph One
“Declare it a tax...”
Hard to believe that at one time, this guy had a brain.
What - FDR missed a spot? Ya mean, there is something MORE destructive than taking us off the gold standard?
Because they’re usually too busy packing fudge.
Insanity is a symptom of advanced syphilis
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.