Should we care about control of the Supreme Court or not, I'll vote yes ...

[cliffside]

gaining control of the Senate should be on everyone's mind. It only takes a simple majority to appoint a SC judge, we need the Senate.

[Walleye]

1. I long for the good old days when the Supreme Court didn't have any party

And they protected our rights rather than trash there

[cliffside]

4. Me too, with the recent decisions that have become way out of control, blanket immunity ...

Roe, Civil Rights, voting maps etc.

[Walleye]

5. And it's not like these rulings have accomplished anything. There are just as many abortions as ever.

[cliffside]

7. Agree, there will always be abortions, except that some women have died ....

because docs were afraid to treat them and it makes it harder for many to afford the treatment needed/wanted.

Finished the last episode of the Handmaid's Tale, have not watched the sequel yet.

[canetoad]

14. I'll rewrite that

There will always be women who refuse to be bullied into having a child when there are safe, medical ways to avoid this.

[cliffside]

15. Thank you :) nt

[Fiendish Thingy]

2. And, in 2029, it will only take a simple majority to kill the filibuster and expand the court. Nt

[cliffside]

8. These rulings can either hurt or help us depending on who is control. nt

[Fiendish Thingy]

11. The damage of the Trump era cannot be repaired without expanding the court

Dems must never again govern out of fear of what republicans might do if they ever get back in power.

[cliffside]

13. Do you wonder about how one rule change impacts another outcome ...

this is just from google AI, so no link (gotta love that going forward )

I do ponder as to why the repubs are better about glossing over rules. I'm thinking that what we might come backs to haunt us???

"Key Details of the 2017 Rule Change:The Catalyst: Senate Democrats used a filibuster to block the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch, denying Republicans the 60 votes needed to end debate and proceed to a final confirmation vote.The "Nuclear Option": Led by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, the Republican-controlled Senate bypassed standard, cumbersome rule-changing procedures by using a parliamentary maneuver. They overturned a ruling by the presiding officer, effectively setting a new, binding precedent that only 51 votes were needed for cloture on Supreme Court nominations.

Historical Precedent: This move extended a 2013 decision by then-Majority Leader Harry Reid, who implemented the nuclear option for all lower-court and executive branch nominations, but specifically left the 60-vote rule in place for the Supreme Court.Direct Outcome: Following the rule change, the Senate voted to end the filibuster and subsequently confirmed Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court on April 7, 2017. You can explore The New York Times to read their historical report on the confirmation.The change in rules had a lasting impact on American politics, removing the traditional need for bipartisan compromise on the nation's highest judicial appointments."

[Fiendish Thingy]

16. The filibuster is an archaic, obstructive tool used by both parties to avoid accountability and block change

It must die a Swift , merciless death once Dems regain power.

[Cheezoholic]

3. I will be surprised if we make it to Nov. without these fascists appointing at least one new far right nut

Theres no integrity AT ALL with this fascist party or Alito AND/OR Thomas riding off into the sunset soon. Especially if their internal polling really shows a potential loss of the Senate or even by Jan. if they do lose the Senate. Think they wouldn't do it? Not me.

[cliffside]

9. Hoping we make it to November and win back control of the Senate, but I agree I'll put ....

nothing past this regime.

[calimary]

6. Another possible adjustment:

GET RID OF that “job for life” bonus.

Supreme Court justices should have term limits too. NOT lifetime appointments. I don’t understand how that hasn’t been corrected yet. Even the President doesn’t get that perk. Maybe a SCOTUS term should be 12 years, with a two-term limit.

Congress: 2-year terms.
President: 4-year terms.
US Senate: 6-year terms.
SCOTUS: 12-year terms. (Six times as long as Congressional terms, three times as long as a Presidential term, and twice as long as a Senate term.

[cliffside]

10. Sounds good to me, especially since things have become so partisan, no reason to appoint for life, like your idea. :) nt

[cliffside]

12. Every vote matters to control the Senate ...

https://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/c.php?g=316498&p=10996482

"...The Judiciary Committee then votes on the nomination and sends its recommendation (that it be confirmed, that it be rejected, or with no recommendation) to the full Senate.

The full Senate debates the nomination.

The Senate rules used to allow unlimited debate (a practice known as filibustering) and to end the debate, it required the votes of 3/5 of the Senate or 60 senators (known as the cloture vote). In April 2017, the Senate changed this rule and lowered the required votes to 51 to end debate on Supreme Court nominations (this is commonly known as "the nuclear option&quot .

When the debate ends, the Senate votes on the nomination. A simple majority of the Senators present and voting is required for the judicial nominee to be confirmed. If there is a tie, the Vice President who also presides over the Senate casts the deciding vote."