(September 1, 2021 at 4:39 pm)onlinebiker Wrote:(September 1, 2021 at 3:49 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Why would thecre be ‘hundreds on the bench’? You can always cap the number of justices by legislation (you know - like you always have). Simply because one party is in the majority doesn’t mean they’ll have the votes to increase the size of the court.
And I’m not sure it would be a bad idea in the long term. The number of SC justices has been increased more than once, didn’t seem to invite disaster.
Boru
Ok bub... You know not of what you speak.
Cap the number " like we always have"?
There is no limit. The number of justices is not spelled out in the Constitution.
The problem is tit for tat. When the balance of power shifts ( and it always does) the party with power is tempted to change things to favor their party.
If the Dems up the ante to say 12 justices to "balance things out" next time the Pubs are in charge it will be 15. Then 18. Then 24. Ect ect ect.
I never said it was spelled out it the Constitution, but it IS spelled out in legislation. And you HAVE capped it at different times with different pieces of legislation - the number has ranged from a low of 5 to a high of 10.
You should look stuff up before playing that ‘you don’t know what you’re talking about’ card.
Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson