SCOTUS rules against Biden student loan handout

[RZehr]

biden is playing with fire inciting a riot over SCOTUS. Former presidents had more class.

Yes...so much more class

Well, not that former president.

[ohio jones]

Polite request: MN does not need to be plastered with Trump tweets. Anyone who wants to read them can go get on Twitter and read them (in context).

I say it's fair game if someone makes the claim that former presidents had more class. Trump would be exhibit A in that discussion.

i also dislike “plastering” the forum with tasteless graphics. it’s allowed.

And here I thought the tweets were going to be in answer to this question:

One thing we do know is that if Trump is re-elected he has already announced that he will not appoint any Blacks or Hispanics to the Supreme Court.

It isn't about that. It is about the fact that Trump announced he will only consider white people for the Supreme Court. Which seems prejudicial to me.

When and where did Trump say either of these things? I wasn’t able to find anything like this.

But after that wall of tweets is posted (I'm not holding my breath), let's try to limit the plastering. And that goes for Youtube videos as well.

[Ken]

One thing we do know is that if Trump is re-elected he has already announced that he will not appoint any Blacks or Hispanics to the Supreme Court.

It isn't about that. It is about the fact that Trump announced he will only consider white people for the Supreme Court. Which seems prejudicial to me.

When and where did Trump say either of these things? I wasn’t able to find anything like this.

In 2017 Trump released a list of 26 potential Supreme Court nominees and announced that he would ONLY be picking justices from this list. Here is his 2017 list: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/br ... ourt-list/

On that list there was one Hispanic justice (Federico Moreno) and one Black justice (Robert Young) who are ages 71 and 72, respectively. So absolutely everyone involved knew those were throw-away names and not candidates who Trump would actually ever pick for SCOTUS. No president ever nominates anyone over age 70 for the supreme court. The remainder of the list was composed of 20 white men and 4 white women. So it was clear to everyone involved that Trump was announcing he was only going to be picking Justices from a list of 20 white men and 4 white women. Which he did. His 3 picks came straight from that list.

He actually announced his list before the 2016 elections saying, If you elect me I will select my SCOTUS nominees only from this list.

[Josh]

Objecting to, disagreeing with, are to be expected, do not compare with attempting to wholly dismantle/reconfigure, esp by way of low-information mob mentality. Pelosi suggesting term limits for SCOTUS is “good for belly laughs.”

Members of the House of Representatives serve 2-year terms and have to be re-elected (re-appointed) by the voters every 2 years.

How often do the public get to re-examine a SCOTUS appointment?

Congress can impeach a justice anytime they want to.

The states could also pass a constitutional amendment limiting SCOTUS terms.

Finally, Congress can pack the court and add seats anytime it wants to.

[Josh]

One thing we do know is that if Trump is re-elected he has already announced that he will not appoint any Blacks or Hispanics to the Supreme Court.

It isn't about that. It is about the fact that Trump announced he will only consider white people for the Supreme Court. Which seems prejudicial to me.

When and where did Trump say either of these things? I wasn’t able to find anything like this.

In 2017 Trump released a list of 26 potential Supreme Court nominees and announced that he would ONLY be picking justices from this list. Here is his 2017 list: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/br ... ourt-list/

On that list there was one Hispanic justice (Federico Moreno) and one Black justice (Robert Young) who are ages 71 and 72, respectively. So absolutely everyone involved knew those were throw-away names and not candidates who Trump would actually ever pick for SCOTUS. No president ever nominates anyone over age 70 for the supreme court. The remainder of the list was composed of 20 white men and 4 white women. So it was clear to everyone involved that Trump was announcing he was only going to be picking Justices from a list of 20 white men and 4 white women. Which he did. His 3 picks came straight from that list.

He actually announced his list before the 2016 elections saying, If you elect me I will select my SCOTUS nominees only from this list.

In other words, Trump said he would nominate black, white, and Hispanic male and female justices.

[HondurasKeiser]

Members of the House of Representatives serve 2-year terms and have to be re-elected (re-appointed) by the voters every 2 years.

How often do the public get to re-examine a SCOTUS appointment?

They're not supposed to.

Lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court and lower courts is not actually found anywhere in the Constitution. For that matter, neither is the size of the Supreme Court at 9 members.

In fact, the US is the only western Democracy that has lifetime appointments for judges. Just to cite some examples:

In the United Kingdom, Supreme Court Justices are selected by a non-partisan judicial commission which is required by law to base their selections on merit only. The commission forwards the name to the Lord Chancellor, Prime Minister and King. They cannot substitute an alternative choice but can only reject the choice and send it back to the Commission for reconsideration. Once appointed by the King, all British judges (not just the Supreme Court) have a mandatory retirement age of 75 (it was age 70 until a few years ago). There are no lifetime judicial appointments in the UK.

In France, Supreme Court justices serve single 9-year terms.

In Germany, all justices serve a single 12 year term and have mandatory retirement at age 68.

No western Democratic country other than the US has both lifetime appointments and no mandatory retirement age.

Yes, Ken every country is different. The UK doesn’t have a written constitution - is that a model to follow as well? Curious, when exactly did life-long appointments and the un-Democratic selection process become a concerning issue for you?

[HondurasKeiser]

It’s a lifetime appointment. Once they’re confirmed , there’s no mechanism to hold justices accountable or remove them.

Except impeachment.

Has a Justice ever been impeached? There’s been resignations due to scandals.

Samuel Chase. Impeached but not removed by the Senate. Impeachments generally are rare - most guilty folk prefer to resign and avoid the public humiliation.

[ohio jones]

No president ever nominates anyone over age 70 for the supreme court.

No political party ever* nominates anyone over age 70 for president, either. Until 7 years ago, and now both parties seem incapable of nominating anyone under 70.

Careful with those blanket statements.


* one exception for re-election, and age was not an issue in that campaign. "I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience."

[Ken]

They're not supposed to.

Lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court and lower courts is not actually found anywhere in the Constitution. For that matter, neither is the size of the Supreme Court at 9 members.

In fact, the US is the only western Democracy that has lifetime appointments for judges. Just to cite some examples:

In the United Kingdom, Supreme Court Justices are selected by a non-partisan judicial commission which is required by law to base their selections on merit only. The commission forwards the name to the Lord Chancellor, Prime Minister and King. They cannot substitute an alternative choice but can only reject the choice and send it back to the Commission for reconsideration. Once appointed by the King, all British judges (not just the Supreme Court) have a mandatory retirement age of 75 (it was age 70 until a few years ago). There are no lifetime judicial appointments in the UK.

In France, Supreme Court justices serve single 9-year terms.

In Germany, all justices serve a single 12 year term and have mandatory retirement at age 68.

No western Democratic country other than the US has both lifetime appointments and no mandatory retirement age.

Yes, Ken every country is different. The UK doesn’t have a written constitution - is that a model to follow as well? Curious, when exactly did life-long appointments and the un-Democratic selection process become a concerning issue for you?

No, actually every other country limits Judicial tenure. The US is the only one that is different in that it doesn't.

I've always been concerned about unaccountable life-long tenure to public positions of immense responsibility. Whether we are talking about Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Clarence Thomas or anyone else.

[Grace]

One thing we do know is that if Trump is re-elected he has already announced that he will not appoint any Blacks or Hispanics to the Supreme Court.

It isn't about that. It is about the fact that Trump announced he will only consider white people for the Supreme Court. Which seems prejudicial to me.

When and where did Trump say either of these things? I wasn’t able to find anything like this.

In 2017 Trump released a list of 26 potential Supreme Court nominees and announced that he would ONLY be picking justices from this list. Here is his 2017 list: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/br ... ourt-list/

On that list there was one Hispanic justice (Federico Moreno) and one Black justice (Robert Young) who are ages 71 and 72, respectively. So absolutely everyone involved knew those were throw-away names and not candidates who Trump would actually ever pick for SCOTUS. No president ever nominates anyone over age 70 for the supreme court. The remainder of the list was composed of 20 white men and 4 white women. So it was clear to everyone involved that Trump was announcing he was only going to be picking Justices from a list of 20 white men and 4 white women. Which he did. His 3 picks came straight from that list.

He actually announced his list before the 2016 elections saying, If you elect me I will select my SCOTUS nominees only from this list.

Justices should be selected based on qualifications, not skin color. Ketanji Brown Jackson is an example of a supreme Court Justice being selected based on skin color. However she will always be remembered for having a past history of being being lenient on vile, evil kiddie porn purveyors, who didn't know when life begins, couldn't answer if unborn children feel pain, and thought you needed to be a biologist to know what a “woman” is.

Two other examples of people being selected for positions based on skin color and being woefully under qualified for the positions granted them. Kamala Harris and the White House press secretary KJP.