• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    5
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    If there were 5 justices, they’d still be functional. As proven in the past, there’s no requirement for 9.

    Esit: I’d - > If

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      6
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      It changed size six times before settling on nine Justices in 1869. Each time it was determined by a congressional vote. It’s not up to POTUS, it’s up to Congress.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        610 months ago

        It ran at 8 for quite a while. No one’s legitimately saying those decisions don’t count.

        The official number can be whatever. Congress doesn’t get to nominate. And SCOTUS would keep deciding.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          610 months ago

          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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            810 months ago

            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.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              310 months ago

              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.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  310 months ago

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

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    310 months ago

                    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