The Trump Presidency

Oklahomahawk said:
Here is the current scotus and the party of the president who nominated them

Repubs
John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States,
Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice,
Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Associate Justice,
Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice,
Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice,


Dems
Stephen G. Breyer, Associate Justice,
Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice,
Elena Kagan, Associate Justice,
RGB who passed away--I'm not counting ACB since as sturg said her appointment/confirmation was towards the of Trumps term.

Isn't that a 5-4 Repub advantage since October of 2018???
Click to expand...

The make up of the court before Kennedy retired was 5-4 dems.

The Republicans had control and could have changed the rules. They didn't. Then Kennedy retired and RGB died.

Wake up.
 
Uh, I am awake thanks.

Repubs
Roberts-----9/05
Thomas----10/91
Alito---------1/06
Gorsuch-----4/17
Kavanaugh-10/18


D
Breyer------8/94
Sotomayor-8/09
Kagan------8/10
RGB------until her death in 9/20


Barrett------10/20----Again I didn't count her to be fair about the numbers as I did count RGB on the Dem side
 
Oklahomahawk said:
Uh, I am awake thanks.

Repubs
Roberts-----9/05
Thomas----10/91
Alito---------1/06
Gorsuch-----4/17
Kavanaugh-10/18


D
Breyer------8/94
Sotomayor-8/09
Kagan------8/10
RGB------until her death in 9/20


Barrett------10/20----Again I didn't count her to be fair about the numbers as I did count RGB on the Dem side
Click to expand...

You are not awake.

What was the court make up before October 2018, or the 2 years year which Republicans had full control?
 
sturg33 said:
You are not awake.

What was the court make up before October 2018, or the 2 years year which Republicans had full control?
Click to expand...

My point was/is that the Repubs had control of the court from 10/18 through the end of Trump's term. It was 5-4 after possum boy joined the court and 6-3 from 10/20 until the present time. The Repubs had over 2 full years to do anything about Roe v. Wade or anything else they considered important but they didn't. The Dems may talk about packing the courts through the legislature but they won't actually do it, just like they'll talk big about banning guns but they won't actually try it. They'd never get elected to anything ever again. And we know well why they don't even try to do anything about the abortion issue, Ron Paul told you that in plain English way back when.
 
The Republicans only had full control of congress from 2017-2018... it.was.during that time they did not have a majority on the courts.

During that time, there was ZERO discussion about changing the rules to get them the court majority.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
My point was/is that the Repubs had control of the court from 10/18 through the end of Trump's term. It was 5-4 after possum boy joined the court and 6-3 from 10/20 until the present time. The Repubs had over 2 full years to do anything about Roe v. Wade or anything else they considered important but they didn't. The Dems may talk about packing the courts through the legislature but they won't actually do it, just like they'll talk big about banning guns but they won't actually try it. They'd never get elected to anything ever again. And we know well why they don't even try to do anything about the abortion issue, Ron Paul told you that in plain English way back when.
Click to expand...

A simple majority isn't enough to do something about abortion due to the Roe decision inventing a Constitutional right to abortion, you would need a large enough majority to pass an amendment. They were never close to that, and with the Murkowski and Collins types, I doubt they even had enough votes in the Senate if a simple majority would have worked.

And it sure seems like Court packing proposals are happening now because for the first time in mine or my parents' lifetime, we have a Court that doesn't have a left of center philosophy. For the past year or so, progressives have been in the same boat regarding the Court that I've been in my entire life. So they want to change the rules.
 
Jaw said:
A simple majority isn't enough to do something about abortion due to the Roe decision inventing a Constitutional right to abortion, you would need a large enough majority to pass an amendment. They were never close to that, and with the Murkowski and Collins types, I doubt they even had enough votes in the Senate if a simple majority would have worked.

And it sure seems like Court packing proposals are happening now because for the first time in mine or my parents' lifetime, we have a Court that doesn't have a left of center philosophy. For the past year or so, progressives have been in the same boat regarding the Court that I've been in my entire life. So they want to change the rules.
Click to expand...

Roe v. Wade was a SCOTUS decision not an amendment to the Constitution. All it would have taken is for some lower court ruling, sort of like the recent one in TX (but arranged a little differently) to go up the appeals ladder until it got to the SCOTUS and they could have struck it down and included Roe with it. They have literally had the 5-4 majority in the SCOTUS since possum boy joined the court, back in OCT of 2018. That's 38 months of "just wait till the next election" rhetoric and no action.

I agree that a Constitutional amendment would be the ideal way to go if there was any hope of it ever happening or if that would actually greatly decrease the number of abortions in this country (it wouldn't). The abortion issue is way more complicated than politicians want to make it. I'm pro-life but I realize it isn't just as simple as "saying no".

If the Repubs ever really got busy and got Roe overturned, the religious right would be thrilled for about 15 minutes and then they'd start "What have you done for use lately". I suspect the longer term backlash of a Roe reversal would damage their electability with moderates and independents. Dems bang the drums about packing the court or banning guns but they aren't serious about either. If they ever did they'd probably never get elected again.

Repubs don't have to use the court packing tactic because Dems can never keep one of their own in the White House long enough to fill up the court to a comfortable majority. That's why they whine and propose packing it. Repubs have never had to resort to the court packing thing because they always seem to be in the White House. Plus they're more patient and IMO (and Ron Paul's too apparently) the abortion issue is much more of a rallying cry for their voting base than it is a hot button "must do" goal of theirs.

That's all I've been trying to say. Not sure how things have gotten so twisted around. I think that's another result of the rabid anger brought about by excessive Kool-Aid poisoning.

By the way, for those who don't like or agree with my opinions here, especially those on court cases and amendments, we should just ask striker the next time he's in town. I think he probably knows more about that stuff than any of us. Can we at least agree on that?
 
sturg33 said:
The Republicans only had full control of congress from 2017-2018... it.was.during that time they did not have a majority on the courts.

During that time, there was ZERO discussion about changing the rules to get them the court majority.
Click to expand...

I don't believe I ever said they did, just that they could have. I also have stated multiple times that this tactic isn't their thing, it's a Dem thing. We are neither debating or arguing about the same things here. I've been talking mainly about the abortion issue and how they've had a majority on there long enough to try to do something. When Trump got elected in 2016 Repubs didn't feel the need to pack the court because they could count and realized there would be enough time for them to fill the court the old fashioned way. plus they didn't think Trump would lose in 2020 so that would give them at least 4 additional years to control the voting balance on the court.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
I don't believe I ever said they did, just that they could have. I also have stated multiple times that this tactic isn't their thing, it's a Dem thing. We are neither debating or arguing about the same things here. I've been talking mainly about the abortion issue and how they've had a majority on there long enough to try to do something. When Trump got elected in 2016 Repubs didn't feel the need to pack the court because they could count and realized there would be enough time for them to fill the court the old fashioned way. plus they didn't think Trump would lose in 2020 so that would give them at least 4 additional years to control the voting balance on the court.
Click to expand...

You have indeed been arguing with me that the Repubs didn't need to change the rules in order to get control. This is factually incorrect. We know for certain that Trump and cocaine mitch would not have threatened to change the supreme court landscape bc they chose not to do it when they had the chance in 2017 and 2018.

Now that the left has lost their 50 year majority they want to change the rules. It's pathetic
 
sturg33 said:
You have indeed been arguing with me that the Repubs didn't need to change the rules in order to get control. This is the same thing I have been saying, the Repubs knew they'd get control back without changing the rules. This is misleading in itself though since Congress does have the Constitutional right to change the size of the court, they've just never done what some of the Dems are wanting to do.

This is factually incorrect. We know for certain that Trump and cocaine mitch would not have threatened to change the supreme court landscape bc they chose not to do it when they had the chance in 2017 and 2018. Seeing as how no US Senate has ever refused to give a hearing to a presidential SCOTUS nominee, not to mention all the other stuff Trump and Mitch did/said I'm not sure how you can justify that statement other than to say it's your opinion that they wouldn't have, which is fine.

Now that the left has lost their 50 year majority they want to change the rules. It's pathetic
Click to expand...
.
 
Its not an opinion that they wouldn't have. It is a fact that they didn't.

Then Kennedy retired and RBG died after Republicans lost full control over congress
 
sturg33 said:
Its not an opinion that they wouldn't have. It is a fact that they didn't.

Then Kennedy retired and RBG died after Republicans lost full control over congress
Click to expand...

I honestly don't know how you could call the first one anything but an opinion since it didn't come up and therefore nobody will ever know for sure. I actually agree with you on the second half. I also have no problem with the Kennedy/RBG part.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
I honestly don't know how you could call the first one anything but an opinion since it didn't come up and therefore nobody will ever know for sure. I actually agree with you on the second half. I also have no problem with the Kennedy/RBG part.
Click to expand...

It didn't come up bc they didn't bring it up.

Its come up now because the democrats are batching they lost power and want to change the rules
 
Oklahomahawk said:
Roe v. Wade was a SCOTUS decision not an amendment to the Constitution. All it would have taken is for some lower court ruling, sort of like the recent one in TX (but arranged a little differently) to go up the appeals ladder until it got to the SCOTUS and they could have struck it down and included Roe with it. They have literally had the 5-4 majority in the SCOTUS since possum boy joined the court, back in OCT of 2018. That's 38 months of "just wait till the next election" rhetoric and no action.

I agree that a Constitutional amendment would be the ideal way to go if there was any hope of it ever happening or if that would actually greatly decrease the number of abortions in this country (it wouldn't). The abortion issue is way more complicated than politicians want to make it. I'm pro-life but I realize it isn't just as simple as "saying no".

If the Repubs ever really got busy and got Roe overturned, the religious right would be thrilled for about 15 minutes and then they'd start "What have you done for use lately". I suspect the longer term backlash of a Roe reversal would damage their electability with moderates and independents. Dems bang the drums about packing the court or banning guns but they aren't serious about either. If they ever did they'd probably never get elected again.

Repubs don't have to use the court packing tactic because Dems can never keep one of their own in the White House long enough to fill up the court to a comfortable majority. That's why they whine and propose packing it. Repubs have never had to resort to the court packing thing because they always seem to be in the White House. Plus they're more patient and IMO (and Ron Paul's too apparently) the abortion issue is much more of a rallying cry for their voting base than it is a hot button "must do" goal of theirs.

That's all I've been trying to say. Not sure how things have gotten so twisted around. I think that's another result of the rabid anger brought about by excessive Kool-Aid poisoning.

By the way, for those who don't like or agree with my opinions here, especially those on court cases and amendments, we should just ask striker the next time he's in town. I think he probably knows more about that stuff than any of us. Can we at least agree on that?
Click to expand...

I thought you were referring to the Republicans having control of the White House and Capitol building. Yeah, the holdup until Barrett was seated was Roberts. He's quite concerned about the image of the Court and would rather not make any major rulings that overturn the status quo. We've seen with Roe and Obergefell that the judges on the other side have no such hesitation.

Now that Barrett is there, he isn't going to have much choice on some issues, they don't need him or the liberals to either vote to hear a case or to make a ruling that's more prominent than he would like.

The kickers will be Kavanaugh and Gorsuch. Kavanaugh is more of a Bush republican than an actual God-and-guns type. I'm still surprised at how upset the Left was about his nomination because he was about the best they could hope for. Gorsuch (as Bedell has pointed out) is a member of a fairly progressive denomination. So it isn't like Bannon or even me is running the court, there's still plenty of ideological diversity. It just doesn't look like it when every liberal on the court has voted in lockstep on every major decision for decades. I do expect Roberts to go along on some 6-3 decisions where he wouldn't have if the vote had been 5-4, and I think he'll do his best to peel off one conservative to force the others into an incremental approach whenever he can. The Mississippi case will probably be his first attempt.
 
I also think you're misreading the tea leaves regarding the religious right. Trump enjoyed so much support from that bloc specifically because he spoke and acted aggressively on that issue. Support was certainly starting to wane prior to that because it was becoming clear that the Chamber of Commerce types were paying it exactly the lip service you spoke of. After Trump there's no going back, the party will either embrace the pro life direction or lose their largest source of support. This is Johnson with the "have <them> voting for us for a hundred years" all over again, but in reverse.
 
Such gaslighting lol

What a loser lol

Crying about “all they want is to lock people up!!”

While his whole rally crying from Gina be his stupid ****ing cult (that posts here) was “these people should be locked up”

Lol
 
sturg33 said:
The Republicans only had full control of congress from 2017-2018... it.was.during that time they did not have a majority on the courts.

During that time, there was ZERO discussion about changing the rules to get them the court majority.
Click to expand...

This is asinine because they did have a shot. You're ignoring that Kennedy was a swing Justice. What happened when Kennedy retired is it turned the swing justice into Roberts, which basically made the court Roberts to run.

It was Kennedy who voted against Obamacare individual mandate.

For you if someone isn't so far right they live in 18th century America they're not right wing.

Let's look at the makeup of the court real quick by what presidents were in office when nominated.

Kennedy - Reagan
THomas - GHW Bush
RGB - Clinton
Breyer - Clinton
Roberts- GW Bush
Alito - GW - Bush
Sotomayor - Obama
Kagan -- Obama

That was the 8 person court as of the beginning of 2016. The reason the democrats are clammoring about examping the court is because of Mitch's **** housery. FIrst by stalling any obama court nomination in 2016. And instilling a Trump justice right away, keeping the general balance from before.

Reagan Nominated Kennedy retired in 2018 replacing him with another conservative judge move the court further to the right.

But the reason dems are mad is because McConnell in 2016 basically said the will of the people should have a say in the next justice, but in very late 2020 that didn't seem to matter, let's get Barrett in right away. Personally I hope this massively backfires on Trump republicans where both Gorsuch and Barrett vote in ways that piss them off and they keep losing because ofhteir obvious hypocrisy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top