Props to MoronInCharge (I am not insulting them, that is their name) at AZ Netroots for pointing out this article in the New York Times. I was not aware it was possible to change the number of justices on the Supreme Court. I am shocked that Bush Administration did not take advantage of this.
I reluctantly think that this should be reserved as a option if the court continues on its current course. I have to say that I am very reticent about opening this Pandora's box. After all, what is good for goose... If we do it after 2008, it is likely that Republicans will do the same in the future. I think if we choose this option, we have to be very careful. First, we should do no more than balance the court. This means only appointing one justice (which opens the possibility of ties). Two, anyone appointed would have to be universally respected and uncontroversial. I think our argument would be that Bush appointed radical judges and we want to appoint beloved (Insert justice here) to moderate the court.
What do you guys think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment