Jen SorensenThis week's comic: What can we do about a Supreme Court packed with corrupt extremists?
#supremecourt #scotus #democracy #law #abortion #cartoon #comic
Kevin RussellThe number of Justices has been 5,6,7, 9, 10 and and FDR sent a bill for fourteen.
the number of justices is a congressional, presidential choice.
FDR wanted fourteen, because the scotus was so old.
R. L. Dane 
Not a political expert by any stretch, but I'm guessing that the democrats are afraid of opening pandora's box, as anything they use will be use against them by a future republican administration.
Paul Armstrong@RL_Dane @jensorensen Republicans aren't afraid of using every dirty trick in the book (look at the supreme and federal court justice scandals) whether or not the Democrats use them.
"The other side is using nukes on us, it'd be truly unthinkable for us to reply in kind".
Frost「
｜霜の狼｜人面獣心」@jensorensen Ah, the court-packing plan. I think President Whatshisface already tried that a long time ago, can't remember whether it worked. :3
John Coates@frost It worked.
Trump & Epstein: Biz partners.
@MugsysRapSheet Interesting idea.
Wm.sonThis seems great. There's got to be something wrong wth it. But I can't see what. The 36 judges selection? Or 18 of each?
Bot4Sale@MugsysRapSheet Mostly works fine until the pool is 'stacked' (3 in 4 judges back the same political party). At that point there's still a chance of selected a 'balanced' 9 judge representation but the odds get lower with each new plant.
@Bot4Sale
Still MILES better than what we have now (and would take SO many years to get an out-of-balance pool that by then, you are likely to be replacing many of them anyway.)
Still MILES better than what we have now (and would take SO many years to get an out-of-balance pool that by then, you are likely to be replacing many of them anyway.)
Aviva Gary@MugsysRapSheet @jensorensen Good first start but you still have to get rid of the corruption angle or you would just have 36 bribed judges (a drop in the bucket to billionaires doing the bribing) 🤑
@Aviva_Gary @jensorensen
Unless you believe Kagen, Sotomayor and Jackson are all corrupt, I don't think any/all reform is doomed to fail.
If that were the case, merely "expanding" the court wouldn't solve anything either, now would it? 🤔
@MugsysRapSheet @jensorensen Oh... I wasn't disagreeing with you. I was saying more or plus as it were. It is true not everyone is corrupt/corruptible but unfortunately many are.
And you are very correct that simply expanding it wouldn't do the trick (if you don't believe me ask Rome how that kind of thing went).
But no... Reform is not doomed to fail. But whatever is done needs to fix the power, people and fairness or it is crap.🤔
@Aviva_Gary @jensorensen
Congress needs to pass a "Morals Clause" for members of the #SCotUS (w/an actual enforcement mechanism.)
Critics say the High Court would simply rule any such law "unconstitutional" declaring Congress has no authority over the SCotUS.
But if the "3-legged stool of gov't balance" still applies (2 branches keep the 3rd in line), then a law passed by Congress and signed by the #Potus has authority over the High Court. We can make it a #ConstitutionalAmendment if needed.
@MugsysRapSheet @jensorensen Also a good idea... but the current court (and the political party with their donor masters) will fight back
(In other words we need to think about this eventuality and plan for it)
MiMi Agnew@jensorensen To bad we can’t vote them out. They’re bad for democracy.
Wokebloke for Democracy@jensorensen
The Democrats, when they could do something about it, weren't interested in repealing the Comstock Act.
The Democrats, when they could do something about it, weren't interested in repealing the Comstock Act.
EyeQ62@jensorensen I'm from England where we have The Lords. Democracy you say. Pfft
Benoît Jones@EyeQ62 @jensorensen on the other hand, our judiciary are not appointed by politicians. The idea that a judge is democrat or republican is crazy, they should be making decisions based on what the law (or constitution) says, not their personal political views.
enoch_exe_inc@jensorensen I’m with “ignore the court”, but that’s mainly because of my own contempt for and lack of faith in legal institutions and their tendency to become bottomless sinks of moral depravity.
I follow the law not because “it’s a good idea” (it’s usually not) or because it encourages a sense moral obligation (it doesn’t), but because I live in constant fear of what cruel, inhumane, and taxpayer-funded punishments await me if I don’t.
Ellie@jensorensen The inverted personal automobile looks like a duck.
Andre 
@jensorensen They are gonna need a vast majority, with reps in it. And they are completely fine with a bigot SCOTUS, as there is likely more to come
Wandering HermitCorrupt Supreme Court justices can be impeached and removed from office. Just saying...
Grumble@jensorensen The solution to pollution is dilution.
Expand SCOTUS to 17 justices. Expand the House to 2500.
AGTMADCAT 🇬🇧🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼🇵🇸@jensorensen Panel 2 LFG boyyyyzzzz. If we in the New California Republic can ally with the good people of the Cascadian Free Collective, we can seal off the Federal Remnant's access to the Pacific!
NoctisEqui 🇺🇦🇵🇸🇪🇹🏳️🌈@jensorensen
Impeach the obviously corrupt Justices & remove them from the bench immediately.. Put together a board to review their judgements in the light of any demonstrated favoritism aka bribes. Nullify the laws based on those wrong decisions. ‘Lawful Evil’ shall not stand!there are now 13 District courts, we need a total of 13 justices in total.
Impeach the obviously corrupt Justices & remove them from the bench immediately.. Put together a board to review their judgements in the light of any demonstrated favoritism aka bribes. Nullify the laws based on those wrong decisions. ‘Lawful Evil’ shall not stand!there are now 13 District courts, we need a total of 13 justices in total.
masukomi@jensorensen A friend of mine suggested the expanding the court option. However, the last time the democrats tried to appoint a judge the republicans just refused to approve any of the candidates until trump was in office. The republicans have pushed things beyond the breaking point. Expansion could RADICALLY backfire if they did the same thing again, and there's no reason to assume they wouldn't. It gets them what they want.
Chris Johnson@jensorensen Precisely.
And there are further reasons to do so as well.
@jensorensen nicely done