Democrats Threaten Supreme Court: Reject Second Amendment or Face Court-Packing

Democrats Threaten Supreme Court: Reject Second Amendment or Face Court-Packing

This is a discussion on Democrats Threaten Supreme Court: Reject Second Amendment or Face Court-Packing within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; This could be a real feces storm.... WASHINGTON, DC –Democrat presidential candidates and senators this week renewed their threats that unless the U.S. Supreme Court ...

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 40
Like Tree98Likes

Thread: Democrats Threaten Supreme Court: Reject Second Amendment or Face Court-Packing

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array G26Raven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Southwest
    Posts
    6,938

    Democrats Threaten Supreme Court: Reject Second Amendment or Face Court-Packing

    This could be a real feces storm....

    WASHINGTON, DC –Democrat presidential candidates and senators this week renewed their threats that unless the U.S. Supreme Court issues liberal rulings on the Second Amendment and other issues, Democrats will fundamentally restructure the nation’s highest court, a shocking threat to judicial independence not seen since the 1930s.

    Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) filed an amicus brief (“friend of the court” legal brief) at the Supreme Court on Monday, joined by follow leftwing partisan Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Richard Durbin (D-IL), and presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), demanding that the Supreme Court back out of a case over one of the most restrictive gun control laws in America.


    https://www.breitbart.com/pre-viral/...court-packing/
    "Don't drive your truck when you're all jacked up..." Gretchen Wilson
    2% of the U.S. population thinks the Cold War was caused by climate change

  2. #2
    Member Array M1911A1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northwest Washington State
    Posts
    377
    FDR tried it, as you note, in the 1930s. It was quickly defeated, notwithstanding FDR's popularity–perhaps our most popular President ever.

    Why these brain-deficient Democrat yahoos think that they can accomplish what FDR couldn't defeats my powers of reasoning.
    Do they somehow believe that threatening the Supreme Court will help them to win the case before it? As I said: Brain deficient yahoos.
    Steve
    Retired Leathersmith and Practical Shooter

    "Qui desiderat pacem, præparet bellum."

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array SouthernBoyVA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    2,641
    Such moves are very dangerous to individual liberty. It is for situations just like this that Jefferson included the text that he did in his Declaration of Independence and that Mason and Henry successfully convinced Madison to draft a Bill of Rights for ratification before those two men would agree to ratify the federal constitution.
    Last edited by SouthernBoyVA; August 14th, 2019 at 09:25 AM.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    America First!

  4. Remove Advertisements
    DefensiveCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member Array Rabbit212's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    South Texas
    Posts
    1,650
    Sigh...... why don’t these stories actually provide a link to what they are “reporting”? How difficult is it to provide a link to this amicus brief?? I always walk away from these type of articles feeling like I just read the poster for a bad movie with only certain “positive” words cherry picked out of a review to make it sound better. I feel like I just read some “fake” news from our side but then again everyone has an agenda right.
    Those are my principles, and if you don't like them.....well, I have others.

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array Hoganbeg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    3,899
    "New York City — and the state of New York — recently changed their gun control laws in light of this lawsuit, in an effort to convince the justices to dismiss the case, arguing now the named plaintiffs in the case have received through legislation everything they wanted, and thus are no longer injured by New York City to give them standing to litigate this matter."

    This is not a strong argument IMO but without the specific language referred to there is no way to tell. In my view, the court would still retain standing simply based on NY law gun law in general.

    [Rabbit, you have voiced one of my pet peeves. That type of reporting is very common these days and always raises my skepticism.]
    G26Raven and Rabbit212 like this.
    "...as politics in Washington and elsewhere grows increasingly un-moored from reality, humanist wisdom provides us with one final consolation: There is no greater lesson from the past than the intractability of human folly." Heather Mac Donald

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array Hoganbeg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    3,899
    I found this link buried in the comments below the article. Others here may find it of interest.

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketP...us%20Brief.pdf
    "...as politics in Washington and elsewhere grows increasingly un-moored from reality, humanist wisdom provides us with one final consolation: There is no greater lesson from the past than the intractability of human folly." Heather Mac Donald

  8. #7
    Senior Member Array baren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    510
    G26Raven, Sister and Hoganbeg like this.

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array jmf552's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    6,218
    I think the Republicans should call their bluff. McConnell should put court packing to a floor vote right now. Why? If they increased the size of the court to 15 now, who would get to nominate the new six justices? Trump. Who would get to confirm them? The Republican Senate. Instead of the balance of the court being 5/4 conservative, it would wind up 11/4. The court would get packed alright, but it would get packed with conservatives. The court would stay conservative for decades.

    Court packing would only work for the Democrats if there was a Dem president and Senate. Hopefully the presidency doesn't turn until 2024 and some are predicting the Senate will stay Republican for a long time, because there are more red states than blue.
    Last edited by jmf552; August 14th, 2019 at 09:49 AM.
    baren and NECCdude like this.
    Attack Squadron 65 "Tigers", USS Eisenhower '80 - '83, peackeeping w/Iran, Libya, Lebanon and E. Europe

  10. #9
    Distinguished Member Array Novarider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    East TN
    Posts
    1,489
    The MINORITY party in the senate did this? They don't have the votes to pull this off. Publicity stunt? Even RBG is against this.

    Dems will absolutely loose their minds if Trump wins in 2020 and the Republicans proceed expand and pack the court like the Dems are threatening.

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array HotBrass45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,605
    Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
    I think the Republicans should call their bluff. McConnell should put court packing to a floor vote right now. Why? If they increased the size of the court to 15 now, who would get to nominate the new six justices? Trump. Who would get to confirm them? The Republican Senate. Instead of the balance of the court being 5/4 conservative, it would wind up 11/4. The court would get packed alright, but it would get packed with conservatives. The court would stay conservative for decades.

    Court packing would only work for the Democrats if there was a Republican president and Republican Senate. Hopefully the presidency doesn't turn until 2024 and some are predicting the Senate will stay Republican for a long time, because there are more red states than blue.
    Then the Marxists would probably just want to increase from 15 to 23 judges
    NECCdude likes this.
    I was born a gun owner, it wasn't a choice, I didn't become one later in life...I was born this way

  12. #11
    Member Array NoDeer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    197
    "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it", or words to that effect. The dems forget that they created the so called nuclear option when it came to appointing judges, and how it got turned around and bit them in the a$$ when the repubs got control of appointments. Same thing would happen with this proposal. I can see 149 SCOTUS judges by the time they figured out this is a dumba$$ idea.
    baren, G26Raven and NECCdude like this.
    By now our forefathers would be shooting.

    Life is too important to take seriously.

    Lansing Muzzle Loading Gun Club
    visit us at: http://www.lansingmuzzleloadinggunclub.com/

  13. #12
    Member Array buckwheatpaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    NE TEXAS
    Posts
    229
    It is time for Americans to reform Congress by demanding no pensions, term limits and the same medical coverage non-Congress people face! We should demand it; vote on it and take control of those that represent us and not control us!
    Hatchee, baren, G26Raven and 5 others like this.

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array Nmuskier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Upper Michigan
    Posts
    5,033
    Every time progressives complain about federal judges not being elected, remember this plot. Elected representatives have a very difficult time bullying judges who can only be removed by impeachment.

    Yes, I know that word is thrown around casually today, but out of the thousands of federal judges, how many can you remember being impeached? How many on the supreme court?
    Psalm 144:1

  15. #14
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion county, Ohio
    Posts
    32,669
    Lemme see if I have this straight. If the judiciary doesn't meet their leftist, anti-gun agenda demands now, they will take back the Senate and White House in 2020 and teach them a real lesson?

    Goosebumps, I tell ya. The loons are giving me goosebumps.
    "Stop being dangerous, and you become edible." William Aprill

    "Slaves, enjoy your freedom." Chuck Klosterman

  16. #15
    Senior Member Array KILTED COWBOY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    880
    Is there anything about our separation of government three branches that the left likes?
    If they can't win at the ballot box, they just try to legislate the ideas that the majority of Americans don't like.
    The Republicans just sit there smiling and take it.
    Time to play hard ball with theses socialists

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •