An expanded SCOTUS wouldn’t help in any way: the same problem will happen repeatedly where the composition will be biased (even though the current corruption is legendary). And we’re just as likely to have the R’s do it now and pack it against us anyway
Beg to differ…it would neutralize the imbalance and force them to focus SOLELY on the law; which is what they SHOULD already be doing. I’m not saying add more to an advantage like Republicans would, equity is what people want.
I don’t understand: how would 13 be any different to 9…? If we get 7 justices as bad as Alito and Thomas, we’re in exactly the same position as now.
Rules governing the President and Presidential powers CLEARLY have to be defined and updated to close any ambiguity.
Clearly. But the GOP is too corrupt to allow that, and with SCOTUS lost too, America is already lost.
Lowering their pay and benefits of course.
So making Justice Thomas’ corruption more likely as they are bribed more easily?
My personal opinion, Americans should only have legislators meeting in sessions to craft laws and business that we vote on annually, so the Will of the people is actually that.
Current SCOTUS and Presidency is result of a vote: how would annual votes change it except that you’d only have a government for 9 months of the year, and the GOP would try to oppress voters then too?
Add 3, to represent the 12 Districts…the 13th isn’t REALLY the same. Leave it at 12 so they would be EQUAL, no ADVANTAGE! Reform the rules with term limits, ethics rules, and external oversight body with powers to monitor and sanction. Same could be said for Senate and House.
The reason it’s an odd number is so there can’t be a tie. The advantage also comes from justices acting in partisan manner; regardless of numbers, if you have a set of corrupt justices they will swing things their way.
I understand that in the 13th but we need to be able to work together in getting things done. If a Justice ignores the fact, a defendant overstepped their Constitutional authority or took benefits from people involved, the oversight SHOULD step in. THAT is what’s wrong.
I can’t understand what you’re saying you want: everything you’re suggesting suffers from the same problem of partisan control. If Congress’ Oversight is controlled by GOP, they won’t stop SCOTUS. If SCOTUS is expanded, we’ll still have times when partisan justices are in control.
OIG isn’t partisan. Not every function of our government is partisan either and does the work of rooting out corruption, regardless of who is in power. This administration of whatever this is, doesn’t respect anything and dismantling these institutions.
OIG isn’t meant to be partisan, but the GOP has shown that when they’re in control, it will be. This is why I say the problem is deeper than expanding SCOTUS can help :-(
What we HAVE BEEN doing is no longer good enough and it is as obvious as the noses on our faces.
100% Something has to change. The Founders couldn’t have envisioned such a corrupt character actually getting into office or the checks and balances would have been stronger. If we don’t make them stronger now, America is lost forever. The problem is clear, but the solution is not so much :-(
I’m aware. If it is unclear to anyone, our systems of governance and components of all branches are in DESPERATE need of massive overhaul. We cannot function this way and self isolate on the international stage, leaving us blind and vulnerable.