Bizarre, the Indian woman who claims to be black, who got No votes but still managed to get to the top of a corrupt party after a coup on a senile old man..
Their tenure is in Art 3. And Articles 1 and 2 don’t explicitly vest any power to the Legislative or Executive branches to decide on the number. That said, Congressional Judiciary Acts of 1789, among others, fixed the number.
Yes, 2/3 States so 38 or 2/3 Congress to ratify Constitution Amendment. We have seen Biden admin use tangent rules to bypass like OSHA to mandate Covid shot to keep your job; change wording of Title IX to put in gender ideology; Sarbane Oxly accounting rules to move Jan 6 trespassers to felony convictions; go against Supreme Court to use taxpayer funds to cover student debt. Our States fight back thus because no 2/3 legislation. A packed SC would give dictatorship as they shown they want.
Article III provides that Judges the Supreme Court (and inferior courts) hold their offices during “good behavior.” The Constitution does not provide a time limit for holding that office.
To amend the Article:
1. Proposal:
An amendment must be proposed either by a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, or
By a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures.
2. Ratification:
Once proposed, the amendment must be ratified by three-fourths (38) of the state legislatures, or by ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states.
Next-Certification: Once an amendment is ratified by the required number of states, it is certified by the Archivist of the United States and becomes part of the Constitution.
Never happening.
All Biden and Harris are doing is politicizing and maligning our incredible Judiciary (and when I say that I mean both the likes of Scalia and Ginsburg). They’re ruining the best, most prestigious part of our system. That theses people dare to play games with the integrity of the Justices—who are amazing—is beyond sick.
A justice’s “good behavior” is all that should matter. Not whether you like their rulings.
Agreed. What they are doing is de-legitimizing the 3rd branch of government. If they can convince at least half the country not to respect the Court’s rulings, that would mean total control in their minds. What it would actually mean is civil war.
You're gaming language for the short-sighted purpose of self-interest Ayaan, IMHO. Going along to get get along with like-minded others to earn the power of personal prestige and your slice of the social-media limelight, within the rank & status Ponzy Scheme, we use the reality-labeling word 'society' to imaginatively define.
Donald Trump didn't do exactly what you believe Kamala Harris will do, did he?
Are you so immersed in the blah, blah, blah, forest, of the politics-of-experience that you cannot 'see' the forest for the trees, so to speak? And if you really are into global politics, why no essays about the Gen Z political revolution that's happening in Kenya right now?
Have you forgotten the beauty and wisdom of Mother Africa? You know that continent where humanity was born and where the wild imagining of some supernatural creator God is considered rather childish by those who follow the philosophy of Ubuntu, honoring the 'reality' of their ancestors with the simple expression, "we are because they were."
A philosophy echoed in the Western world's ode to fallen comrades, "at the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them."
You're still so young Ayaan, and are you quite certain that your on the right side of history, that you haven't been 'infected' with the white-man's religion and an ultimately illusory sense of reason? If 'woke is a mind virus transmitted by 'ideas' then using that 'logic,' can all systems-of-belief be imaginatively described as a mind virus?
Consider R.D. Laing’s intuitive, "life is a sexually transmitted disease and the mortality rate is 100%"
Has your education made it inconceivable that the university-of-life, can and does enable the maturing of your innate intuitions?
The writer fails to appreciate the distasteful history of Roosevelt’s attempts to change the composition of the U S Supreme Court, which a President cannot do under the U S Constitution; the writer is raising a “red herring”without any basis; the writer fails to assign blame to Senate Majority leader McConnell and to Senator Lindsey Graham who lied to the public after previously stating that he would support expeditious action on nominations to replace a deceased Supreme Court Justice.
The commentary is purely speculative at the moment. James Hawley
Excellent suggestion about running on the court issue.
Kamala will be a disaster unfortunately, just wrong on all policy choices , lets hope America sends her back to Kal-ifornia ,
She is well informed on legislative process while Trump has no experience except in issuing exec. Orders which were invalidated.
Bizarre, the Indian woman who claims to be black, who got No votes but still managed to get to the top of a corrupt party after a coup on a senile old man..
Lunatics have taken over the asylum!!
The number of justices is not fixed by the constitution.
Their tenure is in Art 3. And Articles 1 and 2 don’t explicitly vest any power to the Legislative or Executive branches to decide on the number. That said, Congressional Judiciary Acts of 1789, among others, fixed the number.
Don't Americans need a constitutional amendment before they can make this sort of alteration in how they are governed?
Yes, 2/3 States so 38 or 2/3 Congress to ratify Constitution Amendment. We have seen Biden admin use tangent rules to bypass like OSHA to mandate Covid shot to keep your job; change wording of Title IX to put in gender ideology; Sarbane Oxly accounting rules to move Jan 6 trespassers to felony convictions; go against Supreme Court to use taxpayer funds to cover student debt. Our States fight back thus because no 2/3 legislation. A packed SC would give dictatorship as they shown they want.
It’s a bit more than that:
Article III provides that Judges the Supreme Court (and inferior courts) hold their offices during “good behavior.” The Constitution does not provide a time limit for holding that office.
To amend the Article:
1. Proposal:
An amendment must be proposed either by a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, or
By a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures.
2. Ratification:
Once proposed, the amendment must be ratified by three-fourths (38) of the state legislatures, or by ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states.
Next-Certification: Once an amendment is ratified by the required number of states, it is certified by the Archivist of the United States and becomes part of the Constitution.
Never happening.
All Biden and Harris are doing is politicizing and maligning our incredible Judiciary (and when I say that I mean both the likes of Scalia and Ginsburg). They’re ruining the best, most prestigious part of our system. That theses people dare to play games with the integrity of the Justices—who are amazing—is beyond sick.
A justice’s “good behavior” is all that should matter. Not whether you like their rulings.
Agreed. What they are doing is de-legitimizing the 3rd branch of government. If they can convince at least half the country not to respect the Court’s rulings, that would mean total control in their minds. What it would actually mean is civil war.
You're gaming language for the short-sighted purpose of self-interest Ayaan, IMHO. Going along to get get along with like-minded others to earn the power of personal prestige and your slice of the social-media limelight, within the rank & status Ponzy Scheme, we use the reality-labeling word 'society' to imaginatively define.
Donald Trump didn't do exactly what you believe Kamala Harris will do, did he?
Are you so immersed in the blah, blah, blah, forest, of the politics-of-experience that you cannot 'see' the forest for the trees, so to speak? And if you really are into global politics, why no essays about the Gen Z political revolution that's happening in Kenya right now?
Have you forgotten the beauty and wisdom of Mother Africa? You know that continent where humanity was born and where the wild imagining of some supernatural creator God is considered rather childish by those who follow the philosophy of Ubuntu, honoring the 'reality' of their ancestors with the simple expression, "we are because they were."
A philosophy echoed in the Western world's ode to fallen comrades, "at the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them."
You're still so young Ayaan, and are you quite certain that your on the right side of history, that you haven't been 'infected' with the white-man's religion and an ultimately illusory sense of reason? If 'woke is a mind virus transmitted by 'ideas' then using that 'logic,' can all systems-of-belief be imaginatively described as a mind virus?
Consider R.D. Laing’s intuitive, "life is a sexually transmitted disease and the mortality rate is 100%"
Has your education made it inconceivable that the university-of-life, can and does enable the maturing of your innate intuitions?
What point are you trying to make.... ??? Whatever it is, you come across as ignorant.
Excellent advice
The writer fails to appreciate the distasteful history of Roosevelt’s attempts to change the composition of the U S Supreme Court, which a President cannot do under the U S Constitution; the writer is raising a “red herring”without any basis; the writer fails to assign blame to Senate Majority leader McConnell and to Senator Lindsey Graham who lied to the public after previously stating that he would support expeditious action on nominations to replace a deceased Supreme Court Justice.
The commentary is purely speculative at the moment. James Hawley