That was a practical necessity due to Justices physically riding circuit & the absence of permanent circuit-level appellate judges. It is not a coincidence that the Court's size has remained constant since those things changed in 1869. Circuit riding was fully abolished in 1891.https://twitter.com/beyerstein/status/1316775799173853186 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @baseballcrank
The Supreme Court has changed to meet the needs of different eras, and it's going to keep changing to remain relevant to our large, complex and growing polity.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @beyerstein
By which you mean your desired outcomes. Let's not pretend this is anything else.
3 replies 1 retweet 17 likes -
Replying to @baseballcrank @beyerstein
...you say as if conservative "originalism" isn't entirely about manipulating the historical record to make the Constitution agree with your desired outcomes.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jeffwoodhead @baseballcrank
The Senate Judiciary committee literally risked their lives to confirm their preferred justice before the election. To ensure their desired outcomes.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Why would the GOP majority run roughshod over norms and the rules of the senate itself, seeking to confirm the nominee after a ridiculous 4 days of hearings, if they don't expect to get outcome goodies out of it?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @beyerstein @jeffwoodhead
A ridiculous 4 days? Until relatively recently, there were no hearings. Ginsburg's hearings, which Biden & Kagan ran, were 4 days. Breyer's were 4 days. Kagan's were 4 days. Sotomayor's were 4 days. Historic norms are on the R side:https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/history-is-on-the-side-of-republicans-filling-a-supreme-court-vacancy-in-2020/ …
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @baseballcrank @beyerstein
Except every Republican "norms are on our side" argument is completely undermined by the Merrick Garland incident. As soon as Graham & co. went back on their promise to not confirm a justice in an election year discussion of norms went out the window. It's now just hypocrisy.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
-
-
Replying to @baseballcrank @beyerstein
Read it in August when you wrote it. Your argument is an obvious ploy to start from an outcome and backfill a justification for it. It's punditry p-hacking.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.