Wednesday, April 21, 2021

Commentary: Keep Nine to Keep the Independent Judiciary

Congressional Democrats have introduced legislation that would add four more justices to the U.S. Supreme Court, boosting the number of justices on the bench from nine to 13, as Democrat congressional leaders are going all-in on packing the Supreme Court. 

This is just more evidence that the very slender, far-left Democrat majority intends to seize and maintain power using any tactic available, even if it means destroying the independence of the judicial branch of government.


  1. Its time to start shooting the bastards.

  2. "Independence" = enough conservatives on the court to offset democratic party activists.

    The right answer is never letting even one a activist on any court. I would also accept a government never being powerful enough so that it matters who is on the court.


  3. So, the Demonrats want to upset 152 years of law, precedent and tradition so that they have a judicial rubber stamp for all the unconstitutional laws they plan to pass, especially the new election laws that will guarantee they stay in power forever.

    But hey you know, they're doing it in the best interests of the country.

    Did I tell about this bridge that I have...


  4. If the Right actually had leaders that cared they simply play tit for tat and if they court stack, they's court stack and when needed ignore the people on the court trying to stop it. You appoint 3 we appoint 5 and so on. 1200 Justices? So be it.

    Really though court independence is bunk, sorry to say, The Judicial branch for the most part these days, folks like the late C.J. Scalia aside only answers to its Leftist peers and its handlers. Otherwise nonsense like Roe v. Wade, Gay Marriage and Gun Control would not have been allowed.

    More importantly its nearly impossible to stop subversion, they'll lie or do anything to get into power and cam easily be bought.

    If you think say Amy Comey Barret is going to fix things?

    Hah hah no.

    What do you think the 2 Million book deal she got was for. Hint it wasn't because she is amazingly insightful and will sell books

    As Vox Day put it she took the ticket


    Fundamentally once corruption and subversion reach a certain point you can't fix the system on the margins, you can't just appoint good judges since you can't trust them and anything you do will be nullified by the bad ones for like with Robert out of fear or comity .

    Look at President Trump being disobeyed by his generals on troop removal for another example.

    The only solution is to get power by any means necessary and use that power to set the rules you want . After your interregnum is over and you have a moral people (we are not a conventionally religious one) and if very lucky some kind of decent post Christian religious one, we can get back the the Republic.

    This isn't what anyone wants but unless someone has a better idea, its the only way to have your America. Otherwise assuming the Left doesn't go White slavery or genocide, you had better get Woke fast.

    Power abhors a vacuum and a Right that refuses the call to power or worse puts the money boys in charge is creating that vacuum. Rule my morals or be ruled.

    1. I hope that you are not a lawyer. Roe v Wade was indeed a poor decision, everyone agrees. But it was a bad decision because it never should have been accepted by the court, they should have found a better case, and ruled on the merits.
      Gay marriage, that was inevitable. Marriage is either an institution of the state, or of the church. If it is an institution of the state, then the state cannot discriminate between two consenting adults, simply on the basis of sex, since there is no legitimate reason for saying that procreation is in the interest of the country, now that we have over 330 million people, with more wanting in from other countries everyday.
      Gun control, the courts have actually ruled in favor of the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. They have just failed to follow up with a case forcing rogue cities or states to accept those rulings.
      I doubt that the Democrats can pull off the changing of the number of the court, but they might possible attempt to try and get rid of the lifetime appointment. From my reading of the U.S. Constitution, in Article III sec. 1, it appears that Supreme Court Justices are meant to remain in office for life, meaning that it would take an amendment to the U.S. Constitution in order for them to change the term of a Justice.
      In any case, the Democrats need to consider long and hard the things that they plan on doing. Because the same things that the apply for themselves will also apply when the Republicans one day take over control of government, and you can bet that they will have as the first parts of their agenda, getting even with the Democrats for the dirty tricks that they are playing, right now.

    2. It was judicial activism. It created law. I do not care of anymore just waiting.

    3. Supreme Court justices are indeed appointed for life assuming ‘good behavior’. In short, if they are not working in good faith and you can’t get them to retire or resign, impeach them.
      The problem is defining what ‘in good faith’ means. At least - to someone wHo considers getting power and holding it above the founding principles of our republic.

  5. Why? They aren't independent now. They are the judicial branch of blm

  6. [rocketride]

    Just one more reminder of what 'Congress' is a euphemism for.

  7. SCROTUS is irrelevant anymore. As is jury duty and voting.


I moderate my comments due to spam and trolls. No need to post the same comment multiple times if yours doesn't show right away..