Paying My Respects to Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg - Page 23 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15129052
Good post Stormsmith.

American prisons are a national disgrace. They house many people who ought not be there, many people who ought not be there very long and a great many will leave far more damaged than when they got there.

We do not practice rehabilitation in the US at all. We practice retribution. There are 18 year olds in prison in the US doing several years for car theft. They will not be required to attend school or training. They will however, learn a lot about how to become a better criminal.

We should start with the drug nonsense. Putting people in jail for drug related offenses is absurd. Even small time dealers should not be there. Maybe someday.
#15130447
And it's done, the Senate has voted to confirm Barrett 52-48. Every Democrat plus Collins voted against her, every other Republican (including Murkowski) voted for her.
#15130484
@Doug64 @Drlee

I could be wrong, but I think the democrats, if they win the House, Senate and the Presidency will pack the Supreme Court in retaliation for the way the Republicans applied one standard just before Trump was elected and is now applying a hypocritical opposite standard now that they confirmed Barret just before this election was finished. This shouldn't go unanswered by democrats and democrats need to retaliate and dig in for a long serious of tit for tat responses in the long term. I think such retaliation is warranted if the democrats get the House, Senate and the Presidency. If republicans respond back then the democrats are obligated to retaliate once again until the the republicans stop given that they were the ones who started it.
#15130491
@Politics_Observer, the Democrats were the ones that decided to eliminate the filibuster for judges--sure, they tried to pretend that it wouldn't apply to Supreme Court justices, but they were warned at the time that that wouldn't hold and went ahead, anyway. So the person the Democrats can blame for Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett ending up on the Supreme Court is the Democratic then-Senate Majority leader Harry Reid and all the Democratic senators of the time that supported him. As for packing the Court, that would require eliminating the filibuster entirely, and after how the last time ended up I strongly suspect there are Democratic senators that are seriously leery of doing that. If the Democrats do win control of both the presidency and the Senate, what we'll see first is a Democratic civil war over the filibuster.

As for the so-called "double standard," McConnell was simply following Senate precedent. Throughout our history (including Barrett), there have been 30 times that Supreme Court seats have become vacant during presidential election years--20 times when the Senate and Presidency were controlled by the same party, and 10 times they didn't. All 20 times both under the same party's control the president has made a nomination, and 18 times those nominees have been confirmed. For the other 10, 4 times the president didn't bother to make a nomination and of the 6 times he did only one was confirmed. So the ones insisting that the Senate break with precedent were the Democrats with their demand that the seat be left vacant.

And no, the Supreme Court is not a Leftist Perfectionist fiefdom that the Republicans have no right to dream might be returned to its role of referee rather than another legislative body. If the Democrats go all out to return control of the Court to Leftist Perfectionists, they are going to do immense damage to the Supreme Court, to the federal government, and to the country generally.
#15130500
Politics_Observer wrote:@Doug64 @Drlee

I could be wrong, but I think the democrats, if they win the House, Senate and the Presidency will pack the Supreme Court in retaliation for the way the Republicans applied one standard just before Trump was elected and is now applying a hypocritical opposite standard now that they confirmed Barret just before this election was finished. This shouldn't go unanswered by democrats and democrats need to retaliate and dig in for a long serious of tit for tat responses in the long term. I think such retaliation is warranted if the democrats get the House, Senate and the Presidency. If republicans respond back then the democrats are obligated to retaliate once again until the the republicans stop given that they were the ones who started it.

Meanwhile nothing gets done. I suggest we forget the tribalism thing.
#15130512
And now Barrett has been sworn in at a White House ceremonry as the 115th justice on the Supreme Court by Justice Clarence Thomas. Now it's over.
#15130517
@Doug64

We'll see if it's over. I wouldn't think it was over if I was the democrats. This would be the beginning of retaliation and retaliating back until the republicans stop and start playing fair and square again. If the democrats get control of the House, Senate and Presidency, you could very well see the democrats fight back by packing the courts in retaliation to the republicans unfair play. And if that happens, it's because the republicans started it and brought this on. I also think democrats need to dig in and prepare for a long, drawn out, protracted back and forth with republicans until the republicans learn to stop and start playing fair again. I certainly don't think the democrats should take this lying down. But we'll see what the democrats do if they manage to gain control of the Senate, House and Presidency.
#15130519
@Politics_Observer, see my previous response for who the Democrats can thank for starting this. One hint, it's not a Republican. One thing to remember, Republicans have been struggling to place an Originalist majority on the Supreme Court for almost a century. Now that they've succeeded in creating a 5-1-3 split, if the Democrats regain control in Washington and actually move to eliminate the filibuster and pack the Court, there is going to be an explosion.
#15130520
@Doug64

I disagree. If republicans were dealing with democrats like me then those republicans better prepare for a long drawn out, bitter back and forth and I wouldn't stop until the republicans stop first. I would not surrender or given an inch to the republicans on this issue. It would go on forever if need be as far as I am concerned. Sometimes you got to take a stand and fight it out no matter how long it takes. Democrats need to grow some balls and need to let the republicans know they are willing to go years or decades fighting back and forth until the republicans simply learn to start playing fair and stop applying double standards. Otherwise the back forth tit for tat will never end will just go on forever. That's how I see it. I would be willing to engage in a very long drawn out tit for tat if necessary. If the republicans don't learn to start playing fair and square and we have en explosion then it's time to explode back.
#15130560
@Doug64

Voter suppression...

Now that it's plain for all to see that a majority in the Supreme Court are not interested in counting valid votes, it's no wonder people think a Trump win is looking ever more likely.

"States want to be able to definitively announce the results of the election on election night... [The] longer after Election Day any significant changes in vote totals take place, the greater the risk that the losing side will cry that the election has been stolen.”

— Kavanaugh, J., concurring


https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... -Order.pdf


:lol:
Last edited by ingliz on 27 Oct 2020 10:44, edited 1 time in total.
#15130561
Doug64 wrote:And it's done, the Senate has voted to confirm Barrett 52-48. Every Democrat plus Collins voted against her, every other Republican (including Murkowski) voted for her.

Well its sure taken along time to get there. Coming from Britain I'm constantly amazed by the lack of partisanship in the US. But perhaps going forth, we can now just have straight party line votes on justices.
#15130562
Doug64 wrote:if the Democrats regain control in Washington and actually move to eliminate the filibuster and pack the Court, there is going to be an explosion.


Then there is going to be an explosion. I suspect one of the first things they will do is bring in 4 more justices and bring in legislation to stop such action happening again.
#15130570
ingliz wrote:@Doug64

Voter suppression...

Now that it's plain for all to see that a majority in the Supreme Court are not interested in counting valid votes, it's no wonder people think a Trump win is looking ever more likely.

"States want to be able to definitively announce the results of the election on election night... [The] longer after Election Day any significant changes in vote totals take place, the greater the risk that the losing side will cry that the election has been stolen.”

— Kavanaugh, J., concurring


https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... -Order.pdf


:lol:

The people that believe the votes of blacks are easily suppressed are condescending racists. It is a despicable way to look at blacks. It assumes black people are dumb. The infantilization of black people needs to stop.
#15130585
ingliz wrote:@Doug64

Voter suppression...

Now that it's plain for all to see that a majority in the Supreme Court are not interested in counting valid votes, it's no wonder people think a Trump win is looking ever more likely.

"States want to be able to definitively announce the results of the election on election night... [The] longer after Election Day any significant changes in vote totals take place, the greater the risk that the losing side will cry that the election has been stolen.”

— Kavanaugh, J., concurring


https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... -Order.pdf


:lol:

A state legislature setting a reasonable deadline that is easily met is not voter suppression, and neither is the Supreme Court recognizing that the state legislature has exercised its authority granted in the Constitution to do so. As noted in multiple concurring opinions. Also from Kavanaugh’s opinion:

    To state the obvious, a State cannot conduct an election without deadlines. It follows that the right to vote is not substantially burdened by a requirement that voters “act in a timely fashion if they wish to express their views in the voting booth.” Burdick, 504 U. S., at 438. For the same reason, the right to vote is not substantially burdened by a requirement that voters act in a timely fashion if they wish to cast an absentee ballot. Either way, voters need to vote on time. A deadline is not unconstitutional merely because of voters’ “own failure to take timely steps” to ensure their franchise. Rosario v. Rockefeller, 410 U. S. 752, 758 (1973). Voters who, for example, show up to vote at midnight after the polls close on election night do not have a right to demand that the State nonetheless count their votes. Voters who submit their absentee ballots after the State’s deadline similarly do not have a right to demand that the State count their votes.

B0ycey wrote:Then there is going to be an explosion. I suspect one of the first things they will do is bring in 4 more justices and bring in legislation to stop such action happening again.

The Left may try, but they may have trouble with Democratic senators unwilling to put an end to the filibuster. As for legislation to stop such an action happening again, all that would do is create a two-step process for future Republicans (the first step being to eliminate the Democrats’ backstop). The only way to prevent future meddling is a constitutional amendment, and I believe one is already being offered in the House ... setting the total number of justices at nine.
ingliz wrote:Where did that come from?

Projecting much, methinks.


:lol:

It can be hard sometimes not to follow the Left’s example of making everything about race, even when it isn’t.
#15130589
Doug64 wrote:Voters who submit their absentee ballots after the State’s deadline similarly do not have a right to demand that the State count their votes.

Even those voters whose absentee ballots have postmarks showing they were submitted before the State's deadline?

“there are no results to ‘flip’ until all valid votes are counted”

— Kagan, J., dissenting
Last edited by ingliz on 27 Oct 2020 13:53, edited 1 time in total.
#15130591
Doug64 wrote:The Left may try, but they may have trouble with Democratic senators unwilling to put an end to the filibuster. As for legislation to stop such an action happening again, all that would do is create a two-step process for future Republicans (the first step being to eliminate the Democrats’ backstop). The only way to prevent future meddling is a constitutional amendment, and I believe one is already being offered in the House ... setting the total number of justices at nine.


"Let the Right talk themselves to death I say!"

Biden is pretty pissed that the Republicans don't hold to their own ideals so I suspect we will see 4 more justices depending on the results on Tuesday. Any trickery will be returned in kind. And yes I suspect Democratic senators will do Bidens bidding. So if you are expecting the Dems to maintain Trump's bidding when he isn't even in office you are going to be disappointed.
#15130594
ingliz wrote:Even those voters whose absentee ballots have postmarks showing they were submitted before the State's deadline?

“there are no results to ‘flip’ until all valid votes are counted”

— Kagan, J., dissenting

If a vote doesn’t meet the reasonable requirements set by the state—including arriving in a timely manner so it can be counted on Election Day—then it isn’t a valid vote. Yes, that means that mail-in ballots are more vulnerable to being invalid, that’s one of the reasons I always vote in-person.
  • 1
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25

Again going in circles because of your lack of l[…]

Listen I have no issue people organizing themselv[…]

"It's like heaven on earth..." http[…]

I really don't get it. You have a failed presi[…]