Skip to content
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • Moments Moments Moments, current page.

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
rachelshelden's profile
Rachel Shelden
Rachel Shelden
Rachel Shelden
@rachelshelden

Tweets

Rachel Shelden

@rachelshelden

Historian, @penn_state. Director, @RichardsCenter. Author, Washington Brotherhood: http://tinyurl.com/qweaw22 . Current work: political culture of 19th c. #SCOTUS.

State College, PA
rachelshelden.com
Joined May 2010

Tweets

  • © 2021 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Rachel Shelden‏ @rachelshelden 18 Mar 2019

      Rachel Shelden Retweeted b-boy bouiebaisse

      This thread by @jbouie is very good. But to pile on here a bit, the original argument by @baseballcrank lacks essentially any awareness of historical context and the ways Americans - esp members of Congress and the Executive Branch - conceived of the Court in this period. /1https://twitter.com/jbouie/status/1107720085714755584 …

      Rachel Shelden added,

      b-boy bouiebaisseVerified account @jbouie
      I know it is the baseball crank, but this is a great example of deceptive argumentation through eliding the details and it is worth unpacking. pic.twitter.com/milYID5JIu
      Show this thread
      1 reply 40 retweets 149 likes
      Show this thread
    2. Rachel Shelden‏ @rachelshelden 18 Mar 2019

      The argument that Courts in the pre-Civil War period were engaging in "packing" is only possible if you assume there was a clearly agreed upon ideal number of justices. But in fact, Americans disagreed about what the ideal number was, for both political and legal reasons. /2

      1 reply 2 retweets 28 likes
      Show this thread
    3. Rachel Shelden‏ @rachelshelden 18 Mar 2019

      Throughout the nineteenth century - both before and after the Civil War - Congress monkeyed around with what the federal Courts looked like. A big part of this was about the responsibilties of justices to the federal Circuit Courts. /3

      1 reply 1 retweet 20 likes
      Show this thread
    4. Rachel Shelden‏ @rachelshelden 18 Mar 2019

      SC Justices in this period "rode circuit" meaning they spent a couple of months in Washington and the remainder of their time serving in a second capacity as justices on the Circuit Courts throughout the states. /4

      1 reply 1 retweet 17 likes
      Show this thread
    5. Rachel Shelden‏ @rachelshelden 18 Mar 2019

      Each judge was assigned a circuit and spent several weeks a year trying cases at each court within the circuit. And as @jbouie pointed out, the 1837 expansion of the Court happened in large part because there was a need for new circuits to account for new states in the union. /5

      1 reply 3 retweets 20 likes
      Show this thread
    6. Rachel Shelden‏ @rachelshelden 18 Mar 2019

      No one at the time would have called this "packing" nor would they have conceived of it this way. And the implication that adding justices was a way to shore up slavery is a wild misreading of the past and the context in which Congress changed the shape of the Court. /6

      1 reply 2 retweets 26 likes
      Show this thread
    7. Rachel Shelden‏ @rachelshelden 18 Mar 2019

      A second problem in what @baseballcrank is arguing is an assumption that Americans have always conceived of the Court in the same way that they do today. /7

      1 reply 1 retweet 17 likes
      Show this thread
      Rachel Shelden‏ @rachelshelden 18 Mar 2019

      But the federal courts did not have the same kind of power or prestige we give the Supreme Court in the 21st century. There was not the same adherence to a hierarchy of the judicial system as we know from great work by Laura Edwards, @marthasjones_, @arielagross and others /8

      1:51 PM - 18 Mar 2019
      • 3 Retweets
      • 25 Likes
      • Kaelik Ariela Gross zzz Mike Trout Jamie Gump, the Wokeness Toucher ResJudicata hvharmonia 100% Unbiased (like everyone else) Light~Angel
      2 replies 3 retweets 25 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Rachel Shelden‏ @rachelshelden 18 Mar 2019

          Local and state courts often had much more power to determine the law. And Congress did not even grant the Supreme Court the full range of jurisdiction in Article III (federal question jurisdiction) until 1875. 9/

          1 reply 3 retweets 20 likes
          Show this thread
        3. Rachel Shelden‏ @rachelshelden 18 Mar 2019

          @baseballcrank is also wrong to assume that Congress never considered further limits on the Court. In fact, there were a number of efforts in eliminate life tenure and further constrain the power of the Court in the 19th century /10

          1 reply 2 retweets 18 likes
          Show this thread
        4. Rachel Shelden‏ @rachelshelden 18 Mar 2019

          The assumption that the Court is and should be independent of politics and that this was how the "founders" envisioned it is really a creation of the 20th century. /11

          1 reply 2 retweets 21 likes
          Show this thread
        5. End of conversation
        1. New conversation
        2. Martha S. Jones, JD, PhD‏ @marthasjones_ 18 Mar 2019
          Replying to @rachelshelden @arielagross

          Thanks for the mention. And, yes, when we dig in we find that Dred Scott, as heinous as Justice Taney’s ideas certainly were, they mostly failed because of widespread resistance to the decision.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/07/06/how-to-resist-bad-supreme-court-rulings/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.442ef958a9b0 …

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        3. Dan McLaughlin‏Verified account @baseballcrank 18 Mar 2019
          Replying to @marthasjones_ @rachelshelden @arielagross

          Yes. It was a vicious cycle: Taney tried to take an issue away from the voters without a basis in the text; his decision galvanized resistance; that resistance in turn alarmed the South. Both sides radicalized, the South bolted, leading to war.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        4. Show replies

      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.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2021 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info