09-06-2022, 06:59 AM
(09-06-2022, 06:00 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I think the fact that it's being brought up now makes it inherently politically un-neutral. This wasn't brought up after Clinton and Obama had appointed 4 of the last 5 Justices, or brought up when Democrat Presidents appointed 17 of 22 Justices from 1933 and 1968.
So because it's being brought up now it makes it impossible for it to be politically neutral.
EDIT: That's not to say I am happy with all the decisions the Supreme Court is currently making, and not that I don't think there is probably a better way to do things out there somewhere. Just that it won't ever be viewed as politically neutral right now, and has no chance of happening.
By politically neutral it means that it doesn't favor one party over the other. It doesn't matter who holds power, no one party is favored and every election would have the same stakes as far as SCOTUS appointments.
Has term limits not been something conservatives are also in favor of?
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
