Biden prepping to endorse sweeping changes to Supreme Court

Stop, just stop already, you're full of **** and you know it. You make me disappointed in our species after unintentionally reading your posts day after day. We could get a monkey out the zoo to pound on the keyboard and come through with more coherent points than you do.

 

Imagine if Republicans attempted to subvert and dramatically change the supreme court while liberals had a 6-3 majority.

Talk about a Banana Republic.

 

This isn't a team sport. Why should any one have a job forever.

 

Nothing is going to happen before the election. I'm talking about AFTER the election - if Biden is re-elected.

 

Maybe they shouldn’t but everyone knows the only reason Democrats are looking to change the make up of the court is because it has a 6-3 conservative majority and liberals would be losing their **** if the roles were reversed here

 

"Subvert" is a pretty strong word for Congressional legislative proposals to reform the Court, proposals that have been viewed favorably across the aisle.

It's interesting that you label this reform proposal, through legal congressional legislation, as akin to a "banana republic" while you see a character like Trump as posing no possible danger to the republic.

 

This is a miss. While rent cap may not be popular (I have no idea), Supreme Court reform is quite popular. A majority of Republicans, Independents, and Democrats all support term limits for Supreme Court justices.

But rent caps should be discussed in another thread - probably the Bidenomics one. His proposal is this accordingly to the BBC:

"Mr Biden's proposal - which requires congressional approval - would cut off tax credits for landlords who try to raise rent by more than 5%. The policy would apply to landlords who own more than 50 units, comprising about 20 million rental units across the country, according to the Biden administration."​

That might also be very popular and thus maybe not be viewed as radical at all.

 

If the Republicans on the court weren’t so damn corrupt and had an ounce of integrity we wouldn’t need to reform it. That’s been the party’s MO for the past few decades, the GOP brought this on themselves.

Pack it, impeach them, investigate the ones who took gifts/bribes, do whatever it takes to make them understand we will not continue to tolerate this any longer.

 

CBS:

The idea behind the plan is to push midsize and large landlords to curb rent increases, with the Biden administration blaming them for jacking up rents far beyond their own costs. That has resulted in corporate landlords enjoying "huge profits," the administration said in a statement.

How the 5% rent cap would work
The rent cap, which would need to be enacted through legislation, would require large and midsize landlords to either cap annual rent increases to no more than 5%. Those that failed to comply would lose the ability to tap faster depreciation that is available to rental housing owners.

The law would apply only to landlords that own more than 50 units, and the Biden administration said it would cover more than 20 million units across the U.S. That "accounts for roughly half of the rental market" in the U.S., according to National Economic Advisor Lael Brainard, who spoke on a call with reporters about the proposal.

Accelerated depreciation is a tax strategy that allows landlords to front-load costs associated with their properties, such as wear and tear. That's useful because such write-offs can lead to paper losses that allow landlords to offset income from rent, for example. Residential landlords can depreciate their properties over 27.5 years, compared with 39 years for commercial landlords.

The risk of losing the tax benefit would incentivize landlords to raise the rent less than 5% per year because keeping the depreciation would prove to be a better deal financially, senior administration officials said on the call.

 

So holding Supreme Court justices to the same
Ethics as every other judge is the same as subverting the court.

 

It's amazing that there isn't an enforceable code of ethics to begin with. Anyone against that has to be shady as hell.

 

Partisanship isn't a reason to attack the proposal, though. I agree, they wouldn't do this if it wasn't 6-3.

On the merits rotating terms is a cure to both a geriatric court and partisanship around nominations. Those are both good things!

And, honestly, considering the issues we face in the world now, I don't want Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, or Roberts on the court anymore especially when it comes to digital issues. People over 70 barely know how to scrutinize their email inboxes and they shouldn't be adjudicating these matters anymore either.

We can all agree that a lot is broken with our current government. But dismissing any proposal to fix things because of who proposes it isn't a serious response and perpetuates dysfunction.

 

I think that we all can agree that ethics should only be applied to the godless liberal judges.

 

Even if I like the proposed changes, there's a dark irony to Biden talking about term limits. (sigh)

 

reported

 

Oh yeah it's "rules for thee, not for me" bullshit.

 

reminiscent of FDR's court packing scheme, and destined for failure just as much

There is a good chance Trump gets to replace Sotomayor, unless she retires this year (which is unlikely, she loves her status as the new RGB too much to give it up).

 

Or reminiscent of Mitch McConnell's ongoing court packing scheme which has been an unmitigated success?

FWIW Biden does not have the vote to ever get a SCOTUS reform bill out of the Senate. The Rs will never willingly give up their current advantage on the SCOTUS.

 

It's not a matter of who. It's a matter of motive. If it was a liberal 6-3 majority and they proposed changes, and potentially conceding some of their favorable position, it wouldn't have the same issue.

This whole thing just reeks of "We don't like the current composition of the court so let's change that via these proposals" not good faith "well we really should take a look at how old some of these folks are."

If Republicans were looking to change the composition of the court during the time of a liberal majority liberals would not be taking this position.

 

After the election with a Biden win it is even less likely. There would need to be such a Dem blowout that they had a majority in the house and 60 or more Senators, you may as well wish that Trump shot magic Student Loan Forgiveness lasers from his ass.

Because that is what the Constitution says. Federal judges, once appointed, keep their position during "good Behaviour" which has been interpreted to mean until they are impeached, they retire, or they die.