@Pat_Walrond

She doesn't seem to mind 😂

Beautiful girl - they better keep an eye out!

@LnzyHou

Not willing to share, eh? 😂

He's very popular there.

As much as I like them, Mark & Pete have time. They can get more governing experience and run in '32.

I've changed my mind. I was wrong about Shapiro. I was watching a clip of him with the press and he has that spark of intelligence and humor that I look for and I will happily support him as the veep candidate.

There's really not a loser in the bunch.

@dietotaku

I have to go. Work to do.

This debate is purely theoretical since a Constitutional Amendment is unlikely to pass any time soon.

Agreeing to disagree is one of the most vital - and most annoying - elements of civilized discussion. I disagree with you but I wish you well.

Okedoke, I'm out. Too much work to do and too little time to get it done.

I hop you all have glorious day and get to pet a puppy! 😃

@dietotaku

But look ahead. What Obama would have done says nothing about what a future president would do.

Eventually the GOP or it's successors will be in office again. And they will wield the same powers much less agreeably than he would have.

Sauce for goose can be pretty bitter.

@dietotaku

Well, the 1990s, actually.

Maybe it doesn't fly but it's the law.

And maybe that's for the better. Not everyone agrees with you or me or the magaloonies on what the laws should be. Major Constitutional changes *should* be a deliberative process not subject to vagaries of current political climates.

@dietotaku

You assume they would have been replaced by someone whose values coincide with yours. Unfortunately, laws that work for one side also work for the other. If we picture Obama, Biden, Harris replacing Alito et al, we can't avoid the possibility of Trump replacing the ones we like with complete assholes through the same rules & processes.

I get that it's frustrating - I'm frustrated, too.

@dietotaku

Again, they are required by law not to bring 1980s or 2020 mores to their decisions. They are to determine if it is consistent with 18th century values codified in the Constitution. Some hold up better than others. That's why there's an Amendment process also in the doc.

@dietotaku

I have absolutely no problem imagining worse corruption.

And who's suggesting consequence-free anything? An explicit enforceable ethics code is a vital part of current considerations re SCOTUS.

@dietotaku

Well, some pretty significant good decisions have been formed since the Federalist Society was formed, among them notably Obergefell v Hodges comes to mind.

The problem arises not with justices to retire when a "good" POTUS is in office, but with the candidates submitted by POTUS and approved by the Senate. That means, inevitably, that the responsibility lies with the voters to haul ass out of their Barcaloungers and cast informed votes putting good people in those positions.

@dietotaku

But they're not supposed to reflect prevailing anything. Their role is clearly defined by law - to examine the cases before them & determine what is/isn't consistent with the Constitution. Legislating to reflect modern sensibilities is the job of Congress.

I have 2 problems with term limits. 1) We'd lose the good with the bad, no assurance the replacements will be better. 2) If you think they're corrupt now, imagine what they'd do/sell if they knew they were about to be out of work

@gemswinc

🤣🤣🤣 Perfect!

@dietotaku

I am 1000% opposed to any term limits. I can get behind a bipartisan SCOTUS review board.

We do need a larger court - 13 sounds good. It would be harder for one POTUS to pack it the way Trump did.

#politics #SCOTUS

This sounds like a threat to me.

Neil Gorsuch Issues Two-Word Warning About Joe Biden's Supreme Court Plan

https://www.newsweek.com/neil-gorsuch-two-word-warning-joe-bidens-supreme-court-plan-1934399