Schumer's shutdown updates

What is most remarkable here is that Senate Democrats have shut down the government, not over a huge policy change such as passing the ACA or abolishing the Department of Education, but over a short-term spending bill that makes no changes to existing policy.

They've voted consistently against reopening the government unless billions in deficit spending is added.
 
Into the Night said:
The Democrats, however, are going to find their negotiating power is quite thin, after this stunt.
Click to expand...

I hope you're right.

What do you think of this?

Diogenes

Thread 'If we don't do it now, while we still can, we may never get another chance.'

Is there any legal or procedural reason why the GOP can't pack the Court after the Schumer shutdown ends?

No.

There is no legal or procedural barrier preventing Republicans from expanding the Supreme Court (commonly called "court packing") once the ongoing government shutdown ends.

The number of Supreme Court justices is not fixed by the Constitution; Article III, Section 1 vests judicial power in "one supreme Court" but leaves the details to Congress.

Congress has changed the Court's size seven times in history (from 6 to 7 in 1789, up to 10 in 1863, down to 7 in 1866, and...
 
Diogenes said:
I hope you're right.

What do you think of this?

Diogenes

Thread 'If we don't do it now, while we still can, we may never get another chance.'

Is there any legal or procedural reason why the GOP can't pack the Court after the Schumer shutdown ends?

No.

There is no legal or procedural barrier preventing Republicans from expanding the Supreme Court (commonly called "court packing") once the ongoing government shutdown ends.

The number of Supreme Court justices is not fixed by the Constitution; Article III, Section 1 vests judicial power in "one supreme Court" but leaves the details to Congress.

Congress has changed the Court's size seven times in history (from 6 to 7 in 1789, up to 10 in 1863, down to 7 in 1866, and...
Click to expand...
Changing the size of he Supreme Court is a bill like any other, and must be passed by the House, Senate, and the President (unless the bill is veto proof). Further, nominees for the new position must be approved by the Senate.

In other words, there is no 'packing of the court'.
 
Into the Night said:
Changing the size of he Supreme Court is a bill like any other, and must be passed by the House, Senate, and the President (unless the bill is veto proof). Further, nominees for the new position must be approved by the Senate.

In other words, there is no 'packing of the court'.
Click to expand...

"Packing the Court" is a colloquialism". Semantics aside, what's your assessment?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top