Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Dems Threaten to Restructure Supreme Court
Date:	8/13/2019 5:52:05 PM

if they don't stop voting among polticial lines.  Hmmm, bet they wouldn't be saying that if it was Dem heavy.  I don't know how Congress would restructure the Supreme Court, because the Supreme Court doesn't work for them.  Congress is the Legislative Arm and the Supreme Court is the Judicial (and the WH and all the agencies and Departements are Executive)  

When the Supreme Court is interpreting Constitutional law, they don't make political decisions.  

Name:	Subrosa -	Reply
Subject:	Dems Threaten to Restructure Supreme Court
Date:	8/13/2019 7:00:44 PM

Dims have always tried to get Supreme Court Justice nominees to tell how they'd vote on certain issues.  Typically, they don't care that it's wrong and unethical to do that.  This latest just translates to 'We want our way or we're going to create chaos for the Court.'

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	Dems Threaten to Restructure Supreme Court
Date:	8/14/2019 8:32:38 AM

Did not seem to bother them at all when the court leaned their way.  If they do stack try to "fix" the court, then know the Republic is dead.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Classic leftist thinking
Date:	8/14/2019 12:43:54 PM

If they lose then they try to change the rules.  Don't like the 2016 election?  Abolish the electoral college.  Don't like SCOTUS decisions?  Pack the court with leftists.  Imagine how they would react if Trump suddenly announced he was increasing SCOTUS to 11 and planned to nominate two more justices and Cocaine Mitch announced he would ram them through before the 2020 elections.  Just imagine how the left and the media would react.

The reality is that the justices put on SCOTUS by a Democrat president vote in lock step.  Only from GOP presidents do we get the "swing" votes.  And they damn well know it which is why they want to pack the court.  I would love to see Trump and McConnell perfectly troll them by waiting until this gets some momentum and then announce they are going to move ahead with that idea and add two more strict constructionists.  Just watch the left and the media fall all over themselves about what a travesty this idea is, Trump is a traitor, blah, blah, blah.  And fear not, they won't be swayed by claims of hypocrisy.  They live that every day.

Name:	MAJ USA RET -	Reply
Subject:	careful Martini
Date:	8/14/2019 4:22:47 PM (updated 8/14/2019 4:24:10 PM)

I think you meant "originalists."

Yes.  Our Constitution was written by men steeped in philosophy by their education and experience.  Originalists believe that the wisdom of Our Constitution takes precedence over expediency.

Some tenets of Judeo-Christian philosophy bear directly on the history of their application. Judeo-Christian applications (Free Masonry) have had historically positive results. Our forefathers applied these lessons to the construct of our Constitution.

For example, the concept of a “republic.” This tenet of Our Constitution insures that the desires of a populous state do not override the inalienable rights of citizens of a remote state. This is the basic premise of the electoral college. TEST: What if the cultural beliefs of the state of California were pressed upon the citizens of Montana? In Montana, the predominant application is on personal responsibility. In the populate dominate of California, the “welfare” of the masses prevails. Indeed, there are significant regions of California where there prevails the concept of personal responsibility... yet, the popular initiatives of the State of California belie personal responsibility!

The loyalty of the Supreme Court lies solely on Our Constitution. If a law or executive order is in violation to Our Constitution, then that law or executive order is (rightfully) overturned (vacated). If Congress disagrees with the Supreme Court, they can… by the consent of the people… create a new law which supports the one vacated by the Supreme Court.

Any allegiance to a political party (or partisan philosophy) is abandoned at the swearing in of a Supreme Court justice. They swear to uphold ONLY Our Constitution.

Any maneuver to change the “numbers” of the Supreme Court is political. Any shift away from the philosophically confirmed tenets of Our Constitution, is a campaign to establish politically convenient interpretation… over the long established and protective guarantees of Our Constitution.

- LMF Curmudgeon

PS: If you don’t understand my discourse… then, you didn’t get any civics in high school or college.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Originalist....yes
Date:	8/14/2019 5:21:08 PM

That is what I mean by strict constructionist.....they view every case in light of whether or not it comports with the Constitution as written....not as they wish it were written or wish it evolved into.