You left out odd...every other democracy is parliamentarian ours as far as i am aware is the only republican even in places were we try to install democracy we put in a parliament
_
For you non-Americans or who have forgotten history

Quick and dirty version: So the last time a president tried messing with the court was FDR who tried to pack it with more justices (from 9 to 15) favorable to his policies via a plan he submitted to Congress. Congress stalled on it and FDR basically outlived/out stayed enough justices that he was able to appoint new ones instead.

There was a bill (would have put 13 seats) during Pelosi's time as speaker but it didn't have enough backing in the party itself to brother bringing it to a floor vote.

Right now Article Three, Section 1 of the Constitution provides that justices "shall hold their offices during good behavior" which is understood to mean that they may serve for the remainder of their lives, until death; furthermore, the phrase is generally interpreted to mean that the only way justices can be removed from office is by Congress via the impeachment process.

Changing the supreme court is up there with adding a new state in how likely it can happen.

I think adding a new state is by far easier. Unlike changing the Supreme Court, we have added new states with some regularity. lol

Not sure I've ever been so terrified of a person before lol

https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinter ... _casually/

Two. Two justices should not be there. Clarence, and whichever the first one Trump put in place. That one should be Merrick Garland, iirc.

The thing is regarding perceived bias; the two Trump put in there didn't even side with him on some issues that were brought to the SC. They really didn't vote the way people originally thought they would and showed that they are not going to just vote the Conservative line. I feel they are doing a better job than people give them credit for. This is mostly about Roe v Wade.

Also; it's Bidens last effort to give McConnell a F U back for telling his boss, Obama, F U by not accepting his SC nominee

She literally would not even react when she shot you for mouthing off about other women.

I agree with you. My statement was more about whether or not they meet my expectations for behavior as members of SCOTUS. I completely agree that a seat was stolen.

1. Oh then never mind liberal concerns towards the independency of Justice, I guess its all fine if the Supreme Court is partisan driven, coz thats the way you do things.
2. The thing is that seems from the distance that the US respect for what Justice stands in a society is on free-fall, but then again that might just be how it has always been there.
3. Oh I guess its just fine that a supreme court is acting in a partisan way... and that it would continue so for many years to come... like I´m sure that will have no lasting effects, that sounds very balanced for the US TBH.

I guess my standards for democracy are just so much higher that I really dont see a point arguing here.

I don't think it's meant to act in a partisan way. I think the original intention was that compromise and balance would always take place to the benefit of the overall republic.

We're not a liberal country with a conservative justice system. We are a diverse country with a diverse Justice system. If all of a sudden we start getting (legally voted in) Republican president after republican president for let's say 20 years in a row (5 elections) we would end up with a SCOTUS that 100% conservative judges. Is that court packing or is that the will of the people?

We know some shenanigans happened with this SC, and we're pissed about it. We should be more focused on making sure what McConnell did never happens again, because that was the root of the problem. You don't go and bugger the whole system because 1 guy with power found a loophole. You fix the loophole.

2, the system (with the above exception) is generally working the way it's supposed to. People on one side counter what people on the other side are doing. Yes we've allowed more violence than normal to creep into our daily political lives, but that can be addressed separately without the Liberal/Conservative bias. Power in the US is like a Pendulum and it's swinging pretty fast right now, we're used to at least 8 year cycles of power.

Remember, the Obama presidency was a HUGE swing to the left from what had been mostly Conservative dominated since the 80s, we just exited the Regan Bush dynasty which was dominated by oil policy and conflict in the middle east. We're now waiting to see if Trump was to far right for this pendulum or if it has decided to not swing this year. It's been back and forth for years (Remember, Obama faced a Conservative dominated House and Senate for most of his presidency so the pendulum wasn't even that far left Nationally)

3 They aren't acting as partisan as they're being painted imo

I just deleted a longer post, because honestly sixty said it better.

But I will keep this bit:

Take for example living in a state that is required by law to allow medical procedures that are completely contrary to your religious, moral, and ethical beliefs. You can't move to a different state thereby avoiding it, because that law is universal. You simply have to live with it, you literally have no choice. This, to you (Cucho), is seemingly a better democracy. This is despite the fact that those states have had very little trouble passing, again through democratic procedures, laws banning those medical procedures as soon as they were legally allowed to do so (in some cases, even before).

SCOTUS didn't make abortion illegal, the states that did, did it to themselves. And the solution to that problem is also democratic elections.

This is what democracy looks like when the population is very diverse. It's harder here, and you get bigger swings, but let's not act like the voters aren't being represented.

You as all modern democracies are liberal democracies Sixty, thats just a fact, and thats where I´m coming from, not that I´m a fevered liberal, its just the common ground I think I share with you guys here.

That said...
1. like I said, I dunno if what Biden is proposing is actually correct, the problem you point is in fact a very real one and I have not considered it. This rises some questions.
I only have the Chilean example so tell in what part this differs from yours:
1. vacancy occurs for what ever reasons
2. The supreme court drafts for candidates and present a 5 list nomination to the acting president.
3. The president selects one candidate and makes a nomination
4. The senate has to get to a 2/3s quorum to pass the nomination
5. The new member is confirmed by the president.
Our supreme court is not lacking of issues but partisanship is not one of them

2. The confidence in our justice system is on free-fall too but for this very real issue that theres a justice for the powerful and a justice for the common people, this has generated lots of resentment and its currently a very relevant political issue, its hard to address coz separation of powers.

3. I think that also might be the case, that's why I tried to be clear that I dunno details and only have this general notion of whats happening there.

PS: democracy is not particularly hard in the US. Its just that you like to think that you are very special.

That's a potentially better nomination system than ours, IMO. But it's not perfect. If the justices pick, then any problem with the justices will tend to get worse over time. It will work right up until it very suddenly starts to fail - hopefully that's in hundreds of years though.

The only thing that makes the US special, from the perspective of Democracy, is our diversity.

I mean its not like the Supreme choses alone, its a very nuanced system, the 2/3s in senate is huge.

Yeah, I like it. Who would know better who is qualified to be a judge than a judge? Makes a lot of sense to me.

I'm not sure I'd want my current SCOTUS team picking the next 5 options for judges though. That's my only concern.

This youtube channel is doing nice animations. You could ask them
https://www.youtube.com/@notsonormal-21/videos

We are but what I said was, we're not a liberal country. I'm not talking our political system but the political leanings of the people. There are just as many conservatives as there are liberals. What I'm personally seeing here in Southern California is an increase in Catholic Hispanics. In my experience working with and hanging out with and just being around, Catholics are pretty conservative and against abortion. They're probably the fastest growing demographic in the US, but thats just from my perspective I didn't look up immigration rates for this post.

Just because the country looks like it's leaning more and more left right now I wouldn't expect that to continue to be the trend over the next 12-16 years.

awwww thanks Darkstar. She just changed the name of the channel earlier this week. She's been up to 4am several nights in a row working on a new animation. Pretty exciting

We're a very conservative country. Most of our liberals would be considered conservatives in many western democracies.

Don't forget to post them here when they are ready!