Running SCOTUS thread

Previously, I never felt like our Supreme Court was dangerous. But I do now, and have thought that, consciously, actually in my head, in those terms, for the past couple of years.

I don't think that's supposed to happen with the Supreme Court.

 

That's not. They're supposed to be the smart ones in the room. This majority shows they're doing the very thing they used to rail about, judicial activism.

They're legislating where that's supposed to be the province of the legislators.

 

1932-46.

 

If you want to rewrite the rules on how government works, I suggest you be on the surviving side (not much winning to be had I’m afraid) in the upcoming Civil War II. Assuming of course the Chinese don’t take it as in invitation to make us a branch office on the other side of the Pacific.

 

And in that time, what atrocities were unleashed upon the land?
Social Security? Life was better when you died in poverty.
Minimum wage? Life was better when you worked for free.
Labor unions? See above.

Also in this time, SCOTUS upheld the poll tax in Georgia and whites-only primaries. So at least it wasn’t all terrible for the true American patriots.

 

FDR's court-packing plan didn't even come up for a vote in the Senate, ever.

 

I think you were thinking of the Warren Court in the 60's and 70's when they did stuff like Brown v. Bd of Education, Miranda v. US, Gideon v. Wainwright (right to counsel), and also, admittedly, seized upon "due process" to apply "fairness" to many different subjects, government dealings, business dealings, pretty much everything. However, I will say the Warren Court was not doing what this clown of a court is doing.

 

Your query was, "Remind me of when the damned libruhls got their way all the time."

It was not, "Remind me of when the damned libruhls got their way all the time AND unleashed atrocities upon the land."

I answered your query.

I was simply referring to the longest period in U.S. history of one party holding all the executive and legislative branches.

 

FDR didn’t take office and the Dems didn’t have the Senate until 33.

 

Once again I am saddened to see so many intelligent posters around still holding out hope that the courts are going to administer any justice to Trump. It’s. Not. Going. To. Happen.
“But TV,” you say, “He’s been found guilty in courts already!”
To which I ask, “and what punishment has he actually been dealt? Show me where those verdicts have impacted Trump one iota.”

 

Well I mean the sentencing for that is next week -- can we at least wait until after then to say he wasn't impacted?

 

The opposite is true. That's why FDR was trying to pack the court.

FDR & The Court Packing Controversy: Full Script | Supreme Court Historical Society

The Supreme Court of the United States soon invalidated many of the president’s New Deal measures as unconstitutional. No Supreme Court had ever struck down so many laws so quickly.

An adamantly conservative bloc of Justices known as the ‘Four Horsemen’ consistently held that governmental regulation of commerce and labor infringed on personal liberties.