| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Land of the Free |
| Democrats float the idea of ‘jurisdiction stripping' of Supreme Court |
| 2020-10-07 |
| Democrats have been threatening to pack the courts if Donald Trump got a third Supreme Court pick. Long before Ruth Bader Ginsburg died the Democrats were threatening drastic action in order to "even" out the court. Now that Donald Trump has that third nominee the calls to pack the Supreme Court have intensified. But that is not the only option the Democrats are pondering, in addition to this the Democrats have introduced a term limits bill and now there is also talk being floated in Democratic circles of "jurisdiction stripping." According to this story, what this means is that Democrats want to limit which types of legislation will be reviewable by the court system—lower courts and the Supreme Court. Here is more: Facing the prospect of a 6-3 conservative majority on the high court following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Hold it, stop everything. This new pick would give the Supreme Court a 5-4 majority. In case the liberals have not noticed, John Roberts is a liberal. Anyway back to the story: In recent weeks professors at top-tier law schools have published articles advocating for jurisdiction stripping or other reforms that would chip away at the court’s power rather than simply alter its ideological makeup. Some liberal proponents believe jurisdiction stripping could help Democrats shield bold future legislation from damaging court battles. In theory a Democratic Congress could pass a health-care plan or a Green New Deal with a provision stipulating that the legislation lies outside the bounds of Supreme Court review. Under variations of the jurisdiction-stripping proposal, Democratic lawmakers could also limit the ability of lower courts to review legislation So you pass a bill with an amendment to the legislation which says the legislation cannot be challenged in court and there is nothing that can be done about it? What happened to the separation of powers? They really are getting desperate but this idea takes the cake, they are losing their minds. Rate this: |
| Posted by:746 |
| #8 This is really easy to hand authority back to the states and localities for most subjects. Here the example is abortion, but pretty much anything not called out in article 1 section 8, or an amendment is fair game to get the courts out of. Section. 2. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. So, pass a law in Congress signed by the President that says, the regulation of abortion is not a delegated power to the United States in the Constitution, and the powers of the United States federal government does not extend to it. |
| Posted by: rammer 2020-10-07 17:32 |
| #7 Making floaters is what the Democrats are best at. |
| Posted by: JHH 2020-10-07 10:35 |
| #6 ^ Note however, that it would remove the legislative branch from gaming the whole process by shifting the blame game to the judiciary for making the call the legislative branch is too cowardly to do. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2020-10-07 08:52 |
| #5 A careful reading of the Constitution would allow limiting the power of the courts. First step is to quit making so many laws for them to 'interpret'. The second, is by legislation very specifically define 'bad behavior' granting the legislative branch more power over retention of judges. Basically, drawing a line, step over and be removed. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2020-10-07 08:49 |
| #4 What entity would or could remove the jurisdiction of the highest court in the land? The Office of the Speaker of the House. The long-term goal is a "Parliamentary Style" Government with permanent Democratic Party control -- note that I did not say 'democracy' at any point. |
| Posted by: magpie 2020-10-07 01:43 |
| #3 FWIW this would actually empower states to pass laws that contravene Roe v. Wade and Obergefell v. Hodges. This move would only make sense if the Democrats were to hold permanently legislative power at the federal and state level. |
| Posted by: Elmerert Hupens2660 2020-10-07 01:28 |
| #2 What are they smoking? What entity would or could remove the jurisdiction of the highest court in the land? Just which court would pick up that jurisdiction - a lower court? A new Pelosi-Schiff congressional-Kangaroo Court? Have these people lost their minds? |
| Posted by: Threasing Elminegum1702 2020-10-07 00:49 |
| #1 Would take a constitutional amendment and I don't see that happening. Perhaps they think they can pass a bill to first allow this and second specifies that it, itself, cannot be reviewed by the courts. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2020-10-07 00:35 |