Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) becomes the second senator, Maine's Susan Collins to express first opposition, on filling the vacancy of the SCOTUS seat left by the passing of RGB. Down to 51 GOP majority in the Senate, this will make Mitch McConnell a little tougher to fill the vacancy accordingly before the Nov. election. My guess is, there are more GOP senator defections to come. It appears I am wrong about that. Sen. Mitt Romney is backing the nomination of RGB seat replacement before the election. 6:3 conservative SCOTUS majority will likely materialize before Nov. election. possibly . i think that they r really going to pressed for time tho with only 40 days left . rump wants it before the election for two reasons one, he can claim a victory of sorts and two by stacking the bench before the election then he will probably get a favorable ruling after the election when he contests bidens victory ! dems know this . so they can and should tell mcconnell they refuse to fund the government extension due at the end of sept and they will refuse to negotiate a new stimulus deal if the gop ram thru a confirmation before the results r known and it is indisputable by any lawsuits . yes the gop will then use that to blame the dems . but the dems r just as good at using counter-narratives as the liars on the gop , tit for tat . i say hunker down and if a conservative is confirmed , increase SCOTUS to 12 justices confirm warren , buttigieg , booker , to the bench and see how much the gop like it when dirty politics is tossed right back in their faces Yeah but first thing first, let's see if Dems could sweep the Nov. election. 12 justices probably won't cut it, Dems need the tie breaker, increase SCOTUS to 13 justices if Dems should sweep. 7-6 will break the tie.
well what do u think about 12 justices being 6 vs 6 so then any future decisions will no longer be decided by one single vote like 5 to 4. it would have to be by 2 votes to break a 6-6 deadlock . meaning 7-5 decision . i like that better than a 5-4 decision , dont u?
"I'm the MOST HONEST HUMAN BEING that God has EVER created!!" - Donald Trump
3
Quote Originally Posted by Europa:
Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) becomes the second senator, Maine's Susan Collins to express first opposition, on filling the vacancy of the SCOTUS seat left by the passing of RGB. Down to 51 GOP majority in the Senate, this will make Mitch McConnell a little tougher to fill the vacancy accordingly before the Nov. election. My guess is, there are more GOP senator defections to come. It appears I am wrong about that. Sen. Mitt Romney is backing the nomination of RGB seat replacement before the election. 6:3 conservative SCOTUS majority will likely materialize before Nov. election. possibly . i think that they r really going to pressed for time tho with only 40 days left . rump wants it before the election for two reasons one, he can claim a victory of sorts and two by stacking the bench before the election then he will probably get a favorable ruling after the election when he contests bidens victory ! dems know this . so they can and should tell mcconnell they refuse to fund the government extension due at the end of sept and they will refuse to negotiate a new stimulus deal if the gop ram thru a confirmation before the results r known and it is indisputable by any lawsuits . yes the gop will then use that to blame the dems . but the dems r just as good at using counter-narratives as the liars on the gop , tit for tat . i say hunker down and if a conservative is confirmed , increase SCOTUS to 12 justices confirm warren , buttigieg , booker , to the bench and see how much the gop like it when dirty politics is tossed right back in their faces Yeah but first thing first, let's see if Dems could sweep the Nov. election. 12 justices probably won't cut it, Dems need the tie breaker, increase SCOTUS to 13 justices if Dems should sweep. 7-6 will break the tie.
well what do u think about 12 justices being 6 vs 6 so then any future decisions will no longer be decided by one single vote like 5 to 4. it would have to be by 2 votes to break a 6-6 deadlock . meaning 7-5 decision . i like that better than a 5-4 decision , dont u?
Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) becomes the second senator, Maine's Susan Collins to express first opposition, on filling the vacancy of the SCOTUS seat left by the passing of RGB. Down to 51 GOP majority in the Senate, this will make Mitch McConnell a little tougher to fill the vacancy accordingly before the Nov. election. My guess is, there are more GOP senator defections to come. It appears I am wrong about that. Sen. Mitt Romney is backing the nomination of RGB seat replacement before the election. 6:3 conservative SCOTUS majority will likely materialize before Nov. election. possibly . i think that they r really going to pressed for time tho with only 40 days left . rump wants it before the election for two reasons one, he can claim a victory of sorts and two by stacking the bench before the election then he will probably get a favorable ruling after the election when he contests bidens victory ! dems know this . so they can and should tell mcconnell they refuse to fund the government extension due at the end of sept and they will refuse to negotiate a new stimulus deal if the gop ram thru a confirmation before the results r known and it is indisputable by any lawsuits . yes the gop will then use that to blame the dems . but the dems r just as good at using counter-narratives as the liars on the gop , tit for tat . i say hunker down and if a conservative is confirmed , increase SCOTUS to 12 justices confirm warren , buttigieg , booker , to the bench and see how much the gop like it when dirty politics is tossed right back in their faces Yeah but first thing first, let's see if Dems could sweep the Nov. election. 12 justices probably won't cut it, Dems need the tie breaker, increase SCOTUS to 13 justices if Dems should sweep. 7-6 will break the tie. well what do u think about 12 justices being 6 vs 6 so then any future decisions will no longer be decided by one single vote like 5 to 4. it would have to be by 2 votes to break a 6-6 deadlock . meaning 7-5 decision . i like that better than a 5-4 decision , dont u?
Nothing is off the table.--Sen. Chuck Schumer
2
Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964:
Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) becomes the second senator, Maine's Susan Collins to express first opposition, on filling the vacancy of the SCOTUS seat left by the passing of RGB. Down to 51 GOP majority in the Senate, this will make Mitch McConnell a little tougher to fill the vacancy accordingly before the Nov. election. My guess is, there are more GOP senator defections to come. It appears I am wrong about that. Sen. Mitt Romney is backing the nomination of RGB seat replacement before the election. 6:3 conservative SCOTUS majority will likely materialize before Nov. election. possibly . i think that they r really going to pressed for time tho with only 40 days left . rump wants it before the election for two reasons one, he can claim a victory of sorts and two by stacking the bench before the election then he will probably get a favorable ruling after the election when he contests bidens victory ! dems know this . so they can and should tell mcconnell they refuse to fund the government extension due at the end of sept and they will refuse to negotiate a new stimulus deal if the gop ram thru a confirmation before the results r known and it is indisputable by any lawsuits . yes the gop will then use that to blame the dems . but the dems r just as good at using counter-narratives as the liars on the gop , tit for tat . i say hunker down and if a conservative is confirmed , increase SCOTUS to 12 justices confirm warren , buttigieg , booker , to the bench and see how much the gop like it when dirty politics is tossed right back in their faces Yeah but first thing first, let's see if Dems could sweep the Nov. election. 12 justices probably won't cut it, Dems need the tie breaker, increase SCOTUS to 13 justices if Dems should sweep. 7-6 will break the tie. well what do u think about 12 justices being 6 vs 6 so then any future decisions will no longer be decided by one single vote like 5 to 4. it would have to be by 2 votes to break a 6-6 deadlock . meaning 7-5 decision . i like that better than a 5-4 decision , dont u?
Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) becomes the second senator, Maine's Susan Collins to express first opposition, on filling the vacancy of the SCOTUS seat left by the passing of RGB. Down to 51 GOP majority in the Senate, this will make Mitch McConnell a little tougher to fill the vacancy accordingly before the Nov. election. My guess is, there are more GOP senator defections to come. It appears I am wrong about that. Sen. Mitt Romney is backing the nomination of RGB seat replacement before the election. 6:3 conservative SCOTUS majority will likely materialize before Nov. election. possibly . i think that they r really going to pressed for time tho with only 40 days left . rump wants it before the election for two reasons one, he can claim a victory of sorts and two by stacking the bench before the election then he will probably get a favorable ruling after the election when he contests bidens victory ! dems know this . so they can and should tell mcconnell they refuse to fund the government extension due at the end of sept and they will refuse to negotiate a new stimulus deal if the gop ram thru a confirmation before the results r known and it is indisputable by any lawsuits . yes the gop will then use that to blame the dems . but the dems r just as good at using counter-narratives as the liars on the gop , tit for tat . i say hunker down and if a conservative is confirmed , increase SCOTUS to 12 justices confirm warren , buttigieg , booker , to the bench and see how much the gop like it when dirty politics is tossed right back in their faces Yeah but first thing first, let's see if Dems could sweep the Nov. election. 12 justices probably won't cut it, Dems need the tie breaker, increase SCOTUS to 13 justices if Dems should sweep. 7-6 will break the tie. well what do u think about 12 justices being 6 vs 6 so then any future decisions will no longer be decided by one single vote like 5 to 4. it would have to be by 2 votes to break a 6-6 deadlock . meaning 7-5 decision . i like that better than a 5-4 decision , dont u? Nothing is off the table.--Sen. Chuck Schumer
i hope the the dems issue a quid pro quo like rump did on the ukrainians
"I'm the MOST HONEST HUMAN BEING that God has EVER created!!" - Donald Trump
4
Quote Originally Posted by Europa:
Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) becomes the second senator, Maine's Susan Collins to express first opposition, on filling the vacancy of the SCOTUS seat left by the passing of RGB. Down to 51 GOP majority in the Senate, this will make Mitch McConnell a little tougher to fill the vacancy accordingly before the Nov. election. My guess is, there are more GOP senator defections to come. It appears I am wrong about that. Sen. Mitt Romney is backing the nomination of RGB seat replacement before the election. 6:3 conservative SCOTUS majority will likely materialize before Nov. election. possibly . i think that they r really going to pressed for time tho with only 40 days left . rump wants it before the election for two reasons one, he can claim a victory of sorts and two by stacking the bench before the election then he will probably get a favorable ruling after the election when he contests bidens victory ! dems know this . so they can and should tell mcconnell they refuse to fund the government extension due at the end of sept and they will refuse to negotiate a new stimulus deal if the gop ram thru a confirmation before the results r known and it is indisputable by any lawsuits . yes the gop will then use that to blame the dems . but the dems r just as good at using counter-narratives as the liars on the gop , tit for tat . i say hunker down and if a conservative is confirmed , increase SCOTUS to 12 justices confirm warren , buttigieg , booker , to the bench and see how much the gop like it when dirty politics is tossed right back in their faces Yeah but first thing first, let's see if Dems could sweep the Nov. election. 12 justices probably won't cut it, Dems need the tie breaker, increase SCOTUS to 13 justices if Dems should sweep. 7-6 will break the tie. well what do u think about 12 justices being 6 vs 6 so then any future decisions will no longer be decided by one single vote like 5 to 4. it would have to be by 2 votes to break a 6-6 deadlock . meaning 7-5 decision . i like that better than a 5-4 decision , dont u? Nothing is off the table.--Sen. Chuck Schumer
i hope the the dems issue a quid pro quo like rump did on the ukrainians
Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) becomes the second senator, Maine's Susan Collins to express first opposition, on filling the vacancy of the SCOTUS seat left by the passing of RGB. Down to 51 GOP majority in the Senate, this will make Mitch McConnell a little tougher to fill the vacancy accordingly before the Nov. election. My guess is, there are more GOP senator defections to come. It appears I am wrong about that. Sen. Mitt Romney is backing the nomination of RGB seat replacement before the election. 6:3 conservative SCOTUS majority will likely materialize before Nov. election. possibly . i think that they r really going to pressed for time tho with only 40 days left . rump wants it before the election for two reasons one, he can claim a victory of sorts and two by stacking the bench before the election then he will probably get a favorable ruling after the election when he contests bidens victory ! dems know this . so they can and should tell mcconnell they refuse to fund the government extension due at the end of sept and they will refuse to negotiate a new stimulus deal if the gop ram thru a confirmation before the results r known and it is indisputable by any lawsuits . yes the gop will then use that to blame the dems . but the dems r just as good at using counter-narratives as the liars on the gop , tit for tat . i say hunker down and if a conservative is confirmed , increase SCOTUS to 12 justices confirm warren , buttigieg , booker , to the bench and see how much the gop like it when dirty politics is tossed right back in their faces Yeah but first thing first, let's see if Dems could sweep the Nov. election. 12 justices probably won't cut it, Dems need the tie breaker, increase SCOTUS to 13 justices if Dems should sweep. 7-6 will break the tie.
well what do u think about 12 justices being 6 vs 6 so then any future decisions will no longer be decided by one single vote like 5 to 4. it would have to be by 2 votes to break a 6-6 deadlock . meaning 7-5 decision . i like that better than a 5-4 decision , dont u?
That could work, sure. I just want a FAIR (non-partisan) court. Even recently with a 5-4 conservative lean the rulings appeared fair to me. Many people agree.
7
Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964:
Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) becomes the second senator, Maine's Susan Collins to express first opposition, on filling the vacancy of the SCOTUS seat left by the passing of RGB. Down to 51 GOP majority in the Senate, this will make Mitch McConnell a little tougher to fill the vacancy accordingly before the Nov. election. My guess is, there are more GOP senator defections to come. It appears I am wrong about that. Sen. Mitt Romney is backing the nomination of RGB seat replacement before the election. 6:3 conservative SCOTUS majority will likely materialize before Nov. election. possibly . i think that they r really going to pressed for time tho with only 40 days left . rump wants it before the election for two reasons one, he can claim a victory of sorts and two by stacking the bench before the election then he will probably get a favorable ruling after the election when he contests bidens victory ! dems know this . so they can and should tell mcconnell they refuse to fund the government extension due at the end of sept and they will refuse to negotiate a new stimulus deal if the gop ram thru a confirmation before the results r known and it is indisputable by any lawsuits . yes the gop will then use that to blame the dems . but the dems r just as good at using counter-narratives as the liars on the gop , tit for tat . i say hunker down and if a conservative is confirmed , increase SCOTUS to 12 justices confirm warren , buttigieg , booker , to the bench and see how much the gop like it when dirty politics is tossed right back in their faces Yeah but first thing first, let's see if Dems could sweep the Nov. election. 12 justices probably won't cut it, Dems need the tie breaker, increase SCOTUS to 13 justices if Dems should sweep. 7-6 will break the tie.
well what do u think about 12 justices being 6 vs 6 so then any future decisions will no longer be decided by one single vote like 5 to 4. it would have to be by 2 votes to break a 6-6 deadlock . meaning 7-5 decision . i like that better than a 5-4 decision , dont u?
That could work, sure. I just want a FAIR (non-partisan) court. Even recently with a 5-4 conservative lean the rulings appeared fair to me. Many people agree.
" In case you're wondering: Yes, Congress can change the number of seats on the Supreme Court. It would just require passing a piece of legislation through both the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate, which the president would then sign. From a mathematical standpoint, Democrats would only need simple majorities in the House and Senate — and a Democratic president — in order to adjust the number of justices. "
8
an excerpt from : https://tinyurl.com/y3xp5cm5
" In case you're wondering: Yes, Congress can change the number of seats on the Supreme Court. It would just require passing a piece of legislation through both the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate, which the president would then sign. From a mathematical standpoint, Democrats would only need simple majorities in the House and Senate — and a Democratic president — in order to adjust the number of justices. "
You would need to pass a Judiciary Act to change the number of justices. That would require two-thirds of the House and Senate. And then three-quarters of the states would need to ratify the Amendment.
omg how freakin ignorant !!
"I'm the MOST HONEST HUMAN BEING that God has EVER created!!" - Donald Trump
7
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox:
You would need to pass a Judiciary Act to change the number of justices. That would require two-thirds of the House and Senate. And then three-quarters of the states would need to ratify the Amendment.
Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) becomes the second senator, Maine's Susan Collins to express first opposition, on filling the vacancy of the SCOTUS seat left by the passing of RGB. Down to 51 GOP majority in the Senate, this will make Mitch McConnell a little tougher to fill the vacancy accordingly before the Nov. election. My guess is, there are more GOP senator defections to come. It appears I am wrong about that. Sen. Mitt Romney is backing the nomination of RGB seat replacement before the election. 6:3 conservative SCOTUS majority will likely materialize before Nov. election.
Not exactly Europa,Romney said he intend to vote based upon their qualifications,..Which to me is what all Senators should do R or D..These Senators that are saying they are going to vote to confirm without even knowing who the person is being nominated ..is ridiculous...how can they know the person is qualified to be a SC Justice if they don't even know the name of that person. Romney is the only one I've heard to date that makes sense..
0
Quote Originally Posted by Europa:
Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Quote Originally Posted by Europa: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) becomes the second senator, Maine's Susan Collins to express first opposition, on filling the vacancy of the SCOTUS seat left by the passing of RGB. Down to 51 GOP majority in the Senate, this will make Mitch McConnell a little tougher to fill the vacancy accordingly before the Nov. election. My guess is, there are more GOP senator defections to come. It appears I am wrong about that. Sen. Mitt Romney is backing the nomination of RGB seat replacement before the election. 6:3 conservative SCOTUS majority will likely materialize before Nov. election.
Not exactly Europa,Romney said he intend to vote based upon their qualifications,..Which to me is what all Senators should do R or D..These Senators that are saying they are going to vote to confirm without even knowing who the person is being nominated ..is ridiculous...how can they know the person is qualified to be a SC Justice if they don't even know the name of that person. Romney is the only one I've heard to date that makes sense..
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox: You would need to pass a Judiciary Act to change the number of justices. That would require two-thirds of the House and Senate. And then three-quarters of the states would need to ratify the Amendment.
omg how freakin ignorant !!
I know, right! Whatta d-mmy! hahahahaha
9
Quote Originally Posted by KellyM_1964:
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox: You would need to pass a Judiciary Act to change the number of justices. That would require two-thirds of the House and Senate. And then three-quarters of the states would need to ratify the Amendment.
Democrats when they take charge of the legislature and presidency can simply make a new law of how many justices should be on the court. The constitution has no clear.language regarding the Supreme Court only the chief Justice is mentioned.
In Roosevelt's time and his introduction of the square deal workers rights and a new monetary system based in silver not gold had significant obstacles in dealing with the Supreme Court. To find any around this he introduced a concept.of 15 judges where he can then appoint 6 to the court. This maneuver led the Republican nominatwd judges to step down. The entire gamesmanship in history is refered to as a switch in time saved the nine.
3
Democrats when they take charge of the legislature and presidency can simply make a new law of how many justices should be on the court. The constitution has no clear.language regarding the Supreme Court only the chief Justice is mentioned.
In Roosevelt's time and his introduction of the square deal workers rights and a new monetary system based in silver not gold had significant obstacles in dealing with the Supreme Court. To find any around this he introduced a concept.of 15 judges where he can then appoint 6 to the court. This maneuver led the Republican nominatwd judges to step down. The entire gamesmanship in history is refered to as a switch in time saved the nine.
Democrats when they take charge of the legislature and presidency can simply make a new law of how many justices should be on the court. The constitution has no clear.language regarding the Supreme Court only the chief Justice is mentioned.
In Roosevelt's time and his introduction of the square deal workers rights and a new monetary system based in silver not gold had significant obstacles in dealing with the Supreme Court. To find any around this he introduced a concept.of 15 judges where he can then appoint 6 to the court. This maneuver led the Republican nominatwd judges to step down. The entire gamesmanship in history is refered to as a switch in time saved the nine.
3
Democrats when they take charge of the legislature and presidency can simply make a new law of how many justices should be on the court. The constitution has no clear.language regarding the Supreme Court only the chief Justice is mentioned.
In Roosevelt's time and his introduction of the square deal workers rights and a new monetary system based in silver not gold had significant obstacles in dealing with the Supreme Court. To find any around this he introduced a concept.of 15 judges where he can then appoint 6 to the court. This maneuver led the Republican nominatwd judges to step down. The entire gamesmanship in history is refered to as a switch in time saved the nine.
You would need to pass a Judiciary Act to change the number of justices. That would require two-thirds of the House and Senate. And then three-quarters of the states would need to ratify the Amendment.
Incorrect. It is not a constitutional amendment so it would only require majority vote in both chambers, and signature by the White House (as new law).
8
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox:
You would need to pass a Judiciary Act to change the number of justices. That would require two-thirds of the House and Senate. And then three-quarters of the states would need to ratify the Amendment.
Incorrect. It is not a constitutional amendment so it would only require majority vote in both chambers, and signature by the White House (as new law).
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox: You would need to pass a Judiciary Act to change the number of justices. That would require two-thirds of the House and Senate. And then three-quarters of the states would need to ratify the Amendment. Incorrect. It is not a constitutional amendment so it would only require majority vote in both chambers, and signature by the White House (as new law).
Dems could flip it to their advantages in case they take back the Senate majority and White House in Nov. 3. It's all about power play, isn't it?
6
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox: You would need to pass a Judiciary Act to change the number of justices. That would require two-thirds of the House and Senate. And then three-quarters of the states would need to ratify the Amendment. Incorrect. It is not a constitutional amendment so it would only require majority vote in both chambers, and signature by the White House (as new law).
Dems could flip it to their advantages in case they take back the Senate majority and White House in Nov. 3. It's all about power play, isn't it?
Politics is ugly business. Most of us common folks wouldn’t have the stomach for this. I am not that old but I don’t remember much of this sheer animosity both sides have for each other. People can disagree of policies but you the tension is thick in the air.
3
Politics is ugly business. Most of us common folks wouldn’t have the stomach for this. I am not that old but I don’t remember much of this sheer animosity both sides have for each other. People can disagree of policies but you the tension is thick in the air.
In the hill of the upcoming Nov. general election, poll shows majority of independents supporting popular votes. The trend is ticking up from 2016, more and more Americans are supporting to replace the Electoral College system.
5
68 percent of independents support replacing the Electoral College system
In the hill of the upcoming Nov. general election, poll shows majority of independents supporting popular votes. The trend is ticking up from 2016, more and more Americans are supporting to replace the Electoral College system.
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox: You would need to pass a Judiciary Act to change the number of justices. That would require two-thirds of the House and Senate. And then three-quarters of the states would need to ratify the Amendment.
Incorrect.
It is not a constitutional amendment so it would only require majority vote in both chambers, and signature by the White House (as new law).
Yep. That was my point earlier.
1
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox: You would need to pass a Judiciary Act to change the number of justices. That would require two-thirds of the House and Senate. And then three-quarters of the states would need to ratify the Amendment.
Incorrect.
It is not a constitutional amendment so it would only require majority vote in both chambers, and signature by the White House (as new law).
Democrats when they take charge of the legislature and presidency can simply make a new law of how many justices should be on the court. The constitution has no clear.language regarding the Supreme Court only the chief Justice is mentioned.
Yes, they can and they should!
But they won't
2
Quote Originally Posted by nature1970:
Democrats when they take charge of the legislature and presidency can simply make a new law of how many justices should be on the court. The constitution has no clear.language regarding the Supreme Court only the chief Justice is mentioned.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.