billionaire media tycoon and mayor of san francisco. vp @foundersfund. ringleader @hereticon. editor-in-chief @piratewires 
Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Refusing to seat a full 1/4th of the federal judiciary when the other party controls the presidency? Lol, okay.
"bad thing happened so i should destroy the entire judiciary" this is sort of like saying if your boyfriend cheats on you it would be perfectly reasonable to light his house on fire
We should have 18 year terms. Every president gets to nominate 1 judge every two years. Get rid of this weird power game where everyone tries to pack the court based on ideology.
There are lots of reforms that would help improve the court. E.g., 18 or 24 year terms so we aren't ruled by geriatrics
Justice Breyer recently gave a lecture to Harvard Law arguing that court packing would destroy SCOTUS’ legitimacy:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bHxTQxDVTdU …
And it is not even "bad thing happened"; it is "very standard thing happened that both parties would have done".
While I agree that courtpacking isn’t the right move, you can’t argue that what the Republican run senate was doing was any better. Manipulation of the judiciary, of any kind, shouldn’t be tolerated. The senate’s job is to approve/disapprove, not determine timing of a nomination
Chalking it up to “bad things happen” is incredibly reductionist. If Republicans want to claim to be constitutional originalists, they should also have fought against delaying Garland’s nomination, as they interpreted what they felt the constitution SHOULD say, not what it says.
Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses Grant all expanded the Supreme Court.https://harvardlpr.com/2019/05/06/the-supreme-court-has-been-expanded-many-times-before-here-are-four-ways-to-do-it-today/ …
This game can literally be played all dayhttps://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/justice-breyer-says-advocates-expanding-supreme-court-should-think-long-n1263274 …
It's more similar to changing the law to make such retribution legal. Whether the first episode of revenge is justified matters little when compared to the endless cycle of retribution that follows.
Hell yeah!
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
