Blog powered by Typepad

« Well done, the SBS ( he wrote through gritted teeth!) | Main | "Just keep buggering on!" »

Tuesday, 27 October 2020

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

ACB is quite an addition to the SC! She is the proper type and style of Justice meaning she looks to the Constitution itself for meaning and guidance and not a Justice who views the Court as an extra legislative branch which we already have. A normal Justice.

The mass slaughter of the child in the womb has to stop. Even Adolf never killed so many.

Barrett was confirmed closer to an election than any other SCJ in history, so the accusation of cheating is shaky. Mitch McConnel, Republican leader of the Senate, defended the move by saying the Constitution allows his power play, which is true.

Know what else the Constitution allows? Expanding the Court. During Abraham Lincoln's administration it was expanded to 10. That might be mentioned in the biography you're reading, David.

If anyone is interested, here's a short history in National Geographic. I dare anyone to claim it's edited by Hillary Clinton:

"Nine justices make up the U.S. Supreme Court: one chief justice and eight associate justices. But it hasn’t always been this way. For the first 80 years of its existence, the Supreme Court fluctuated in size from as few as five to as many as 10 before settling at the current number in 1869. Here’s how the court ended up with nine justices—and how that could change."

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/09/why-us-supreme-court-nine-justices/

Btw, if it were up to me there would be at least 21 Justices on the court. That should stop any political party from establishing one that's too ideological.

I think as many as 50 should be appointed; one representing each state in the union.

Shoot, why not 535? One for every Congress-critter.

Actually Malcolm's suggestion does have much more merit than at first glance should be obviously apparent.

The reason we've found ourselves in this mess in the first place - legislation by the judiciary - is owing to the Congress abdicating its Constitutional obligations.

Doubt that?

Recall Speaker Pelosi saying, "We have to pass the bill to find what's in it."

https://arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/2020/10/28/the-arkansas-poll-is-out-lets-hope-its-wrong

My suspicion is Bob and Max Brantley are very near kin. Maybe brothers.

I know Max has a brother living in Indiana and his brother is named Bob.

I know Max occasionally reads here (owing, my bet is, because "in better times" [his characterization, not, necessarily mine] I linked one of Max' Goldies[?] here which, at the time, Max was reckoning among some of his best reporting - now not so much:

The News had to do with a certain 'Hudson Hallum' getting busted by the feds for absentee [mail in] voting fraud.

Today Max characterizes that one, "an extreme outlier" whatever that means.

Lemme see ...

https://arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/2012/09/05/state-rep-hudson-hallum-pleads-wth-3-others-in-absentee-vote-fraud-case-resigns-from-legislature

Well that's weird.

Suddenly I'm finding there's a paywall.

I wonder why - perhaps the Pulitzer Committee overlooked Bob's brother Max?

JK,

Who knows, Max Brantley might be some shirttail relative, but I've never heard of him. Indiana's more centrist:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/indiana/

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)