“May have just legalized murder by one individual”: Experts alarmed at “stunning” SCOTUS ruling

jeffw@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world – 863 points –
“May have just legalized murder by one individual”: Experts alarmed at “stunning” SCOTUS ruling
salon.com
208

You are viewing a single comment

Do you understand that Congress needs to vote on the number of Justices?

I’m not talking about the vote on the nominee, but the actual number of Justices.

It is currently nine, and will remain nine, until Congress votes on a different number.

I'm not the one being slow. SCOTUS had 8 people while McConnell held up Garland.

Officially SCOTUS was and is nine people. But if the wheels of government turn slow enough, SCOTUS continues to do its job with whoever has made it through the process.

Officially 9, it functioned with 8. No one is credibly saying all those decisions must be thrown out or that SCOTUS cannot function during a shortage.

If that shortage was 4, people would be vocal. But legally, it would still be functional.

I not talking about changing the official number. I never did in this thread until you did.

You started this conversation by suggesting Biden “packs the Supreme Court.”

There are no vacancies. That means congressional vote to increase the number of Justices.

No.

I didn't.

That was the start of this thread. I’m sorry I didn’t notice you were a different commenter.

No worries. Have absolutely done the same in the past.

And I'll take the moment to salute your reliance on fact and citation. Wish more people did the same.

Cheers

With the excessive misinformation out there, we need to work together to get to the truth. Thank you for being so understanding about my mistake.

Have a good night.