United States | News & Politics

4221 readers

212 users here now

Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

No pics of text

Memes are now allowed, as long as they're US centric, general political memes please see !politicalmemes@lemmy.ca

Post news related to the United States.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

exposingfash@midwest.social

cm0002@infosec.pub

cm0002@lemy.lol

House Democrats block constitutional amendment to lock Supreme Court at 9 justices (www.nbcnews.com)

submitted 1 day ago by cm0002@infosec.pub to c/usa@midwest.social

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The vote was 212-206. All but one Democrat voted against it, as openness within the party to expand the high court by four seats grows.

The joint resolution, offered by Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., calls for amending the Constitution to say: “The Supreme Court of the United States shall be composed of nine justices consisting of one chief justice and eight associate justices.”

The office of House Minority Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., encouraged lawmakers to vote “no,” saying the amendment would take away a power intended for Congress and do nothing to address the “affordability crisis” under President Donald Trump.

“This proposed constitutional amendment would permanently fix the number of Supreme Court justices at nine, stripping Congress of yet another constitutional authority that is meant to be controlled by the American people’s representatives,” Clark’s office wrote to lawmakers Wednesday ahead of the vote

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm am shocked that the Democrats would have the spine to do even this.

[–] blitzen@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

To be honest, such a move is symbolic anyway. Because there’s no way a constitutional amendment about anything is passing.

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 5 points 1 day ago

Changing the size of the court doesn't require an amendment. Congress can do it whenever they want.

The only reason it is currently 9 is because the last law changing the size was the Judiciary Act of 1869. The maximum size it has been was 10 shortly before that.

Likewise the Constitution does not explicitly say that they have lifetime tenures. Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution only says that justices "shall hold their offices during good behavior". That had been generally accepted to mean a lifetime tenure, and only removed by impeachment, but it is not an explicit limit. One interpretation of that only refers to illegal activity immediately disqualifying them from holding that office, unrelated to any sort of term limit.

[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's also a symbolic move for 2 Democrats to vote with the Republicans - even more so because it clearly announces to the world, "We're with the pedophile party."