Show this thread
I maintain that the best possible outcome here is that nobody is seated until after the election, and everybody tries their best to calm the fuck down and make their arguments on the assumption that their preferred party will not and should not have perpetual rule going forward.
-
-
It boggles the mind how this dilemma doesn't make people realize how the Supreme Court holds too much power.
-
But if court-packing begins, then Congress has unlimited power. If they can write whatever they want and their SCOTUS will uphold it...
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Any notion that this isn’t the Rubicon is foolish.
-
The Rubicon was Merrick Garland
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It is a fact that no party is going to have "perpetual rule" or anything like it. Unfortunately, that will not prevent people from assuming otherwise and arguing on that mistaken basis.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I like the proposal I've seen to change court terms to 18 years and staggered so that a new justice is appointed every 2 years.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Agreed though I think we need institutional change. Term limits on the court, elimination of the electoral college, etc.
Thanks. 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.