Home Politics MSNBC’s AM Pleasure Present: Pack Supreme Courtroom with 20 New Justices!

MSNBC’s AM Pleasure Present: Pack Supreme Courtroom with 20 New Justices!

9
0

This is not your garden-variety court docket packing. That is court docket packing on crack . . . 

MSNBC common and Nation correspondent Elie Mystal is a type of company who you simply know stays up devising essentially the most outrageous, attention-grabbing, traces conceivable, as a way to hold the invitations coming.

On Sautrday’s AM Pleasure, Mystal proposed that if Democrats win management of the method they need to add as much as . . . 20 extra Justices to the Supreme Courtroom!

 

 

Much more outlandish than Mystal’s proposal was his justification for it. Let’s evaluate his arguments about why there needs to be 20 new justices. First, he claimed the Senate would “get again to confirming judges primarily based on {qualifications} versus primarily based on agendas.”

As if Democrats would not fastidiously display nominees for strict adherence to liberal doctrine?  Biden has already admitted that he would impose a “litmus take a look at” of assist of Roe v. Wade.on potential nominees.

Elie Mystal MSNBC AM Joy10-17-20Subsequent, he insisted there could be “extra reasonable judges” and “extra reasonable opinions.” See above: each new nominee could be licensed 100%-pure liberal. And the six or seven conservatives on the Courtroom could be utterly swamped, their views rendered irrelevant. Essentially the most excessive positions and opinions would rule the day.

And eventually, Mystal could be prepared to allow them to title among the new justices if Republicans had been prepared to “play ball.” Thanks, Elie, however does anybody actually consider that if Biden, Harris, and Chuck Schumer had the facility to call 20 new justices, they’d supply any crumbs to Republicans? 

Talking of absurd, the phase started with a clip of Kamala Harris refusing to debate court docket packing as a result of we do not know “who’s going to be the following president.”

Visitor host Tiffany Cross opened the dialogue by saying that Republicans have “raised the spectre,” i.e., employed a scare tactic, concerning potential Dem court docket packing. And on prime of that, she lamented that the time period itself “court-packing” was “a derogatory phrases from the late Thirties, when FDR proposed increasing the Supreme Courtroom to as much as 15 justices.”

However after Mystal concluded his pitch for a huge court docket packing, Cross agreed: “Yeah, we’d like it.” So not a “spectre,” however an actual risk!

MSNBC’s phase in favor of packing the Supreme Courtroom with 20 new Justices was sponsored partially by Farmers Insurance, Febreze, Fidelity, and Liberty Mutual.

Here is the transcript.

MSNBC’s AM Pleasure 
10/17/20
10:35 am EDT

SENATOR KAMALA HARRIS (D-CA): I imply, I am simply, I’m sorry, however I can not have a dialog about court docket packing round one thing that has not even occurred but, which is who’s going to be the following president, with out coping with what they’ve been doing for the previous few years.

TIFFANY CROSS: For weeks, Republicans have accused Joe Biden and Kamala Harris of getting these secret plans for quote unquote court docket packing, a derogatory phrases from the late Thirties, when FDR proposed increasing the Supreme Courtroom to as much as 15 justices. And Republicans are elevating the spectre that Dems might attempt one thing like that once more.

(….)

ELIE MYSTAL: Yeah, what Republicans are doing is court-stacking. What Democrats are proposing is somewhat bit totally different. Look, I could make the vengeance argument for court docket enlargement all day lengthy. They denied Garland a listening to. They’re placing Amy Coney Barrett by means of throughout an election. They’ve nominated predominantly white, predominantly male judges. I could make the vengeance argument. However I favor court docket enlargement due to its reform prospects, proper? I need a greater Supreme Courtroom, not merely a Supreme Courtroom the place I get to win typically, proper?

So, that is why I favor a Courtroom enlargement of as much as 20 new Justices on the Supreme Courtroom. Folks say, “oh, that is 29 justices. That is unyielding.” No, it ain’t. That is precisely what number of judges the Ninth Circuit Courtroom of Appeals present has on it. 29 justices isn’t unyielding, it is numerous. The good thing about having extra justices is that it fixes the issue that needs to be apparent to all of us by now. Our affirmation course of is damaged. It is damaged as a result of when one among these octenagarians dies, which is a factor that occurs in the world, it represents an existential disaster to the celebration out of the facility. Every is simply too necessary to our legal guidelines and our coverage and our rights.

Every Supreme Courtroom Justice is, frankly, too necessary to our legal guidelines, and our polity, and our rights. If we had 29 justices, every particular person dying could be much less necessary, and it’ll enable us to get again to confirming judges primarily based on {qualifications} versus primarily based on agendas. 

(….)

MYSTAL: Courtroom enlargement permits us to take down the temperature, actually depoliticize the affirmation battle. It permits us to have extra reasonable judges, extra reasonable opinions, popping out of the courts.

(….)

MYSTAL: If we might do court docket packing, I could be glad to have Republicans — if Republicans wish to play ball, I’d be glad to share a few of the seats with them.

CROSS: Proper, yeah. I imply, look —

MYSTAL: However they don’t wish to repair it.

CROSS: — yeah. I imply, you say court docket packing, court docket stacking, or judicial reform. Trigger clearly after 218 conservative judges, we’d like it.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here