Are you in favor of stacking the Supreme Court?

[masterpanthera_t]

(10-27-2020, 05:18 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I think my issue with your phrasing was with the whole "outside the framework" bit because the Constitution is the framework, so if it is a constitutional action, I don't see it as being outside of the framework of the rules. Your example about landed white males, though, would be unconstitutional, so it would be outside the framework.

Throughout the history of this country, the government has had to change their rules to give themselves more power. I don't see this as much more egregious than any other time, to be honest about it. I just know not everyone else will see it the same.

A strong argument. And I think this is why I was hesitant to agree with SSF's point of view of court packing as a tyrannical action, but you've made the argument that was some where deep in my mind which I hadn't quite attempted to get out. Even though I sort of agreed with SSF earlier about court packing being outside of the framework, I think you've shown me why it's not. That was a position that I held before, but kind of forgot that the changing of the laws is itself something given under a larger framework (namely, the Constitution), and this is not tyranny.

Of course pragmatically speaking, it might lead to an arms race (but obviously difficult unless one party again holds all three of the Senate, House and Presidency). Still an arms race that is possible every two decades or so, based on trends.