Is it good to grow the SCOTUS?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by dswoodley, Jul 26, 2007.

  1. dswoodley macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    #1
    From the NY Times

    Link
    Your thoughts? Time to grow the court?
     
  2. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #2
    No.

    I think growing the Court could have disasterous consequences. After all, what is to stop each side from appointment enough justices to have a majority on "his side"? The slippery slope is just too risky.

    It should be pointed out that FDR's intent in expanding the court was to ensure that favorable legislation that was passed would not be held unconstitutional, and that the SCOTUS "adjusted" its position to ensure that the strength of the branch was not diluted. Sounds like something people would expect out of GWB.;)
     
  3. ham_man macrumors 68020

    ham_man

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    #3
    Nope. The SCOTUS has gotten to a point where the nine judges are a hallowed institution of American government. Any attempt to increase or decrease that number would be met with bipartisan fury.
     
  4. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #4
    I'm obviously not an American so forgive me if this is a stupid question, but if Congress and the Senate vote accordingly can they not challenge a Supreme Court ruling?
     
  5. dswoodley thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    #5
    Only by changing a law deemed unconstitutional or going through the constitutional ammendment process (involves state-by-state ratification).
     
  6. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #6
    Ouch. I see how politicising it one way or another has such a big effect then. Thanks.
     
  7. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #7
    Agreed. I don't see it ever changing one way or another.
     
  8. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #8
    I will take the minority opinion here. I do not think the Court enjoys the same respect it once did. It has become more of a public policy body, and is missing the boat on enforcing constitutional law. The lose of privacy and freedom, America has endured for much of the past 30 years, could not have taken place without the participation of the SC.

    As far as 'bipartisan fury', who cares? The republican congress stonewalled the Democrats attempts to appoint judges during President Clinton's terms in office. There were vacancies that went unfilled for years (as I recall). So, I really do not think there is going to be significantly more party fighting than there already is.
     
  9. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #9
    I have to agree with SMM, the Supreme Court has refused to police the Constitution and has moved towards working as a political body—although this has been happening for decades.

    Furthermore, the treatment of Supreme Court justices as bishops in political endgames has withered the Court's reputation. The Court is supposed to be a 'sanity check' but it has just become an extension of each party's objectives.
     

Share This Page