Well, taking several posts and dozens of words to avoid a simple answer, I take it as a sign, so I guess we disagree slightly there.
Biden sounds like he’s got some good, practical ideas for SC reform, with term limits:
Democrats were responsible for the Supreme Court getting into the business of legislation without representation and when it predictably backfired on them they decided “reform” was necessary.
Examples?
Roe v. Wade
So you’re against freedom of reproductive choice for women. That’s against the U.S. constitution. Not judicial activism by Democrats.
Try again.
I’m against the ends justify the means.
How does that relate to Roe V Wade? Still waiting for an example of ‘The Supreme Court getting into the business of legislation without representation’. Roe V Wade is not one, as much as you may want to overturn it based on agenda.
I’m for reproductive choice. I’m against unelected, unaccountable public officials with lifetime tenure engaging in legislation without representation — and so are Democrats now, apparently.
Good, we agree. More consensus building I like it. We’ve agreed on two things today.
I asked for an example of this. Roe V Wade not cutting it. Roe V Wade guarantees women’s reproductive freedom. I think most here agree that is good. You wouldn’t want to take that same right away in Taiwan, would you?
That’s what Biden’s “reform” is all about. Preventing Supreme Court justices from engaging in legislation without representation.
I’m all for that if that’s going on. I’m all for him creating more seats to make up for McConnell stacking the court with the zany ideologue posse crew. My lord its been such a busy year that already seems like years ago.
That’s . . . well, stupid. Both sides can play that game.
That’s what Biden says as well. I personally think un-stacking the court with wackos is a good thing for the country, so he and I disagree there.
Stacking the Court will just end up creating another endlessly squabbling, gridlocked legislature — except an unelected one. The only real solution is to get all judges out of the business of making public policy.
We’re going in circles here sir. I’ve asked you for an example of that beyond Roe V Wade. I don’t know of a case where liberal judges have ‘made policy’. I’m open to the idea that it exists, just please provide an example.
Is Roe v Wade law? Who created it?
Roe v. Wade: Decision, Summary & Background - HISTORY
No it is not a law. It’s a reversal of a statute banning abortions.
Roe v. Wade was a landmark legal decision issued on January 22, 1973, in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas statute banning abortion, effectively legalizing the procedure across the United States. The court held that a woman’s right to an abortion was implicit in the right to privacy protected by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Prior to Roe v. Wade , abortion had been illegal throughout much of the country since the late 19th century.
I see Obama’s name twice there, Trump’s once. That makes me happy.
This is an insightful comment.
Are you getting paid by the post?