What happens with a 6-3 court?

Thomas is retiring next year.

It's also a glamour shot.

Attached: cc06f00221bd316ae243003e630b3bab.jpg (250x342, 17K)

>the Court can't say what things are Constitutional or no
Why have it at all?

Try reading the Constitution maybe.

>Cerca early-mesozoic era

It's for settling disputes between the states, the federal government and a state, or between a state and a citizen of a different state.
Madison and Jefferson believed that any branch of government could declare something unconstitutional.

nothing makes me sicker than the supreme court being boiled down to faggots and dead babies
the jews will destroy the country if they ever get enough seats
they play life like a civ game and this is one of their routes to victory

Kek

>Madison and Jefferson believed that any branch of government could declare something unconstitutional.
So if the President can declare any law he likes unconstitutional, couldn't you have, for instance, Obama declaring that (any law against something you don't like) is unconstitutional? Who is the final arbiter over what laws are and aren't allowed in your worldview?

All that really matters is the median justice. Getting another conservative justice won't move the median from Roberts. (Previously the median was Kennedy, so there was shift when he retired).

>Theoretically, liberal states could just say that the Supreme Court's rulings are not binding on them and just do their own thing.
That would literally be what most of the rulings would be
Striking down roe v wade means it's a state issue
Same with gay marriage.
And I'm assuming afa was meant to be aca. Strike that down or no, it's only got 2 more years until it bankrupts itself.

>Who is the final arbiter over what laws are and aren't allowed in your worldview?
the one holding the biggest gun

[X] Doubt

Okay, so the President, who controls the DoD? We've basically arrived back at monarchy. This is a good thing.

I think only thomas and sotomayor are cool with overturning shit. So the damage is probably done. Even if you flooded the court with originalists only a minority would have the balls to throw those rulings in the trash.

>you now realize the founders created an elected monarchy and that is unironically still the best system and the system that gave us Hitler as well
Holy fucking fuck

The Court can only ever move left.

>elected monarchy
>power struggle every 4 years over what the laws are going to be
Retarded.

>and jews are slowly returning it to the mob rule warned about in democracy since the Greeks who invented it
FUCK

All of you will gladly surrender your phones and computers to the police without a warrant

>power struggle every 4 years over what the laws are going to be
If you do well enough at the job there's no struggle to be had. Well, back when only white men could vote. Now we're fucked.

More like this.
1. RGB holds on until 2020
2. Dems win white house, senate and house
3. Thomas has a heart attack
4. Kavanaugh gets a DWI and steps down
5. Warren appoints Garland and another left loony to the bench.
6. Democrats then vote to expand the court with an additional 4 seats from 9 to 13
7. Vote in 4 hard core leftists judges from the 9th circus.
8. Court is now 10-3 Dem

This. The smearing of the judicial branch is just the next phase of undermining the integrity of the American system, and it's working. Most people hated the executive and legislative, but knew the judicial could be fair. Kavanaugh himself is a fine judge, but this debacle was the real attack and both sides played into it.

You wouldn't have an immigration crisis with mob rule, retard. No one would've voted for the 1965 Immigration Act. Businessmen and farmers wanted it so that they could have cheaper Mexican laborers and Progressives wanted the votes. Almost every other landmark Progressive gain was accomplished by Court declaration explicitly working against democracy by barring states from making laws banning something Progressives wanted.

Republics literally exist to be marketplaces for the purchase of law with a government so weak that it can't ever punish merchants or religious fanatics for antisocial behavior (that would be TYRANNY). It's in the fucking definition that minorities are to be protected by the rule of law and people are on here crying about minorities and Jews while venerating Muh Republic.

A good way to gain power for your faction is to expand the franchise.
>have no factions ever
This has never happened in history.

Being this delusional

He could do that but if he was unjust, the congress would impeach and remove and the people through the electoral college could vote him out during the next election.
In the end, the people would be the final arbitrators.

That's incredibly unrealistic.

You do realize that the Liberals can just assassinate the conservative judges once there's a Dem POTUS again, right? Then just replace them with Liberals judges.

Attached: image.jpg (864x944, 317K)

Really? What if Congress is full of Progressives?
>the people would be the final arbitrators
Where are they forming their views from? Oh wait, media outlets overwhelmingly run by Progressives. Like I said, you'll have the laws oscillating every 4 years. Guns get banned under a Democratic administration, unbanned under a Republican administration, Dems counter with hate speech laws, etc. Total chaos, all because you think having the Constitution theoretically have a fixed meaning is tyrannical. The real takeaway here is that the Republic, in its entirety, is stupid.

>but this debacle was the real attack and both sides played into it.

That did the republicans do?

Garland still has his reputation, he's even elevated as a martyr, and the republican senate smeared themselves. They've never done anything like Kavanaugh, Bork, and Thomas.

Implying the second civil war hasn't already started by the time they start seriously talking about expanding the size of the court

Roosevelt already got the Court to make the Constitution to acquire a new meaning by threatening to pack the Court and no Civil War took place.

It would be easier and more palatable to pack the court. If the democrats win the both houses and the White House, they could blow up the filibuster totally and put 21 or 101 justices on the court.
After what FDR pulled, they should have amended the constitution and set the number at 9.

This shit started even before Bork. Look at Nixon's attempts to replace Abe Fortas on the court. He had to appoint a liberal justice because his nominees were being leaked and scuttled constantly.

There are somewhere around 10K cert requests made each year give or take iirc. They hear less than 100 cases. 4 justices have to agree the case needs to be addressed.
In theory a more right leaning court will select different cases than a left leaning court. What that specifically means in terms of policy is ethereal until the cases are chosen and lower court rulings are either upheld or overturned.

A Republic is only as good as the voting public it represents. The Constitution is only a piece of paper if the people are unjust and corrupt. Mexico has a constitution and it's almost a failed state. Unfortunately because of the I&N act of 1965, the US may be a failed state in a generation or two.

Roosevelt was a presiding over a national disaster, people didn't give a fuck what he did as long as he tried to fix it.
With the freedom of information and independent media, half the country would see it as a blatant and existential partisan attack. It may be enough to light the powder keg of the docile republicucks and get them to fucking do something for once

So the masses are unjust and corrupt because (for example) they tried to stop welfare for illegal immigrants in California and the court system barred them from doing so as it was a violation of separation of powers? Pure idiocy.

October 17, 2018

youtube.com/watch?v=9AaO5s_GOCI&list=PLtlSUlrP88MVjzBlrGsf-UbLHRQ5om1BC&bpctr=1539060407

Attached: image.gif (600x338, 3.18M)

I guarantee the next time a Democrat president nominates a SCOTUS justice Republican senators aren't going to be as respectful and polite as they were for Obama's first two nominees.

I wish I could agree with this. Although I was shocked at Lindsay Grahms display of power. Since the media is squarely a democratic extension, trying to play by the same rules is dangerous for republicans who will he painted as obstructing (vs fighting a heroic battle).

In addition the republicans seem much more about preferring to be a backseat driver and bitching at the dems than doing anything (with Trump being the exception & showing them how to win)

Holy fuck that is good!

Attached: ahhhhh.jpg (249x214, 11K)

youtube.com/watch?v=wkkzgVfI7uk

give it 15 years

Like you said, Trump is teaching them how to not be cucks. Also, Kavanaugh is a Bush guy. The circus Democrats turned his hearing into had to have really pissed off every establishment Republican, which are the type to usually cuck out and not call out Democrats for their shit. Dems established that unprovable shit from high school is fair game for these hearings so their people are going to be hit with the same thing.

I was wondering the same thing myself. Then today while at my in laws my mother in law had a partial breakdown about how trump stacked the courts, stacked the media and was taking away all civil liberties. When I asked how he was doing this she just said he’s crazy and only crazy people who voted for him were going to have freedom. My wife and I both made eye contact and collectively hid our power level. Especially since her mom is a kike lawyer (she’s a token goy who was adopted) I think there’s going to be a mass amount of suicides before end of term or shortly after re-election. The cognitive dissonance is too strong with boomers who can’t imagine life without a shill box (tv) in every room of the house telling them what to think, who to like etc. I predict 40%of liberals or left leaning ppl over 45 will anhero by 11/9/18 cap this and checkem

Attached: 224A8305-843A-4D85-B9DB-B96C864D884F.jpg (260x280, 61K)

Thomas is sick of the bullshit. He may be inspired to stay cuz of the fresh blood and his own importance to the court. But he hates being a justice. If the Republicans keep the Senate he may retire as early as January

>what happens when....there's a 6-3 court.
DEATH DOZERS!!! DEATH DOZERS FROM COAST TO COAST!!!

Or was it the Kill Dozer? I dunno, that guy who welded his bulldozer shut.

this

Saved

Attached: 1509887834302.jpg (248x189, 21K)

What’s going to happen is the left-wing states are gunna ignore the SC and then federal law altogether. The opposite is true for right wing states if dema takeover. We are a major SCOTUS ruling on a controversial subject or an economic collapse away from mass secession from the federal parasite system.

Sotomayor goes before Ginsburg. They're both out by 2020. 55 GOP Senators would approve anybody in an election year. The court is now 7-2

Well that's why expansion was supposed to be solidly against the rules. Kind of important.

>Okay, so the President, who controls the DoD?
No, the American people, who own almost half the world's firearms.

kill dozer

>6-3
8-1 is a real possibility

RBG goes down, 6-3
Breyer says fuck it & retires, 7-2
Sotomayor has diabetic stroke while eating cheesecake, 8-1

Kagan the kike stands alone.

>6-3
You mean 7-2, user. And the constitution is what happens.

>Collins
Who?

>To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions (is) a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem (good justice is broad jurisdiction), and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves." - Thomas Jefferson

fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44729.pdf

>The Congressional Research Service, the research arm of the legislative branch, stated in a recent report that the federal courts were never intended to wield “a final or even exclusive role in defining the basic powers and limits of the federal government.” They observed that “to the contrary, the early history of the United States is replete with examples of all three branches of the federal government playing a role in constitutional interpretation.” The report concludes that it was the complacence of Congress over the past half-century that allowed the judiciary to declare itself supreme to the other branches and to the Constitution.

Here's the thing.

The Judicial Branch only functions by the grace of the Executive Branch.

They actually lack enforcement power because its a separation of power.

Judges these days don't care though which is why some district judges who are civilian judges by the way actually dared to command the DoD to ignore Trump's orders on transgenders.

They literally dared to interfere in the chain of command of the armed forces.