96
Why Isn't Clarence Thomas Facing Impeachment Hearings?
(www.theroot.com)
@politics on kbin.social is a magazine to share and discuss current events news, opinion/analysis, videos, or other informative content related to politicians, politics, or policy-making at all levels of governance (federal, state, local), both domestic and international. Members of all political perspectives are welcome here, though we run a tight ship. Community guidelines and submission rules were co-created between the Mod Team and early members of @politics. Please read all community guidelines and submission rules carefully before engaging our magazine.
Okay but you know expanding the court is a nuclear option. Like the current place we are in is there are 6 "conservative" judges and 3 "liberal" ones. So you would need to introduce 4 new supreme court justices at minimum to upset the current balance. While you are sort of ignoring the Senate has 49 republicans, 48 dems, and 3 "independents". So who again confirms supreme court justices? Oh yeah senate.... This is also ignoring you would have to make a new act to set the number of supreme court justices to 13 and who has majority control over house again? So lets fast forward to some future where dems have unquestionable control over the legislative branch of government where they can't be filibustered down. What exactly stops conservatives from just increasing that number once again to 18 or so when they have control?
Your comment makes me angry, but you have a valid point.
Like I'm not happy with the current circumstances but we have to remember there are many systems in this and if we ever get around to do said changes they have to be done in a careful way since they can absolutely backfire on us. Like I'm quite aware many conservatives play dirty ie "you can't appoint a supreme court justice on an election year, it should be based on the voice of the people" that was quickly ignored once it was advantageous to do.