What do you think of the judge-shifting idea that's been floated here and there? You know, the notion that you could move a judge from one court to another, as long as you don't affect their pay. Does the Constitution necessitate that a judge sit on the same court for life?
My general feeling is that there are a lot of schemes out there, and that the simplest and easiest one is to just add more judges - to the Supreme Court and to lower courts. In the longer run that's not stable and something more systematic is needed, but for now it's the best bet.
I think you have to add billionaires to your list of essential reforms. They own the major media outlets, they invest in politicians (20% of campaign contributions, and growing) and of course in Alito and Thomas. Certainly could be part of the "democracy carve out" for the filibuster, and Congress would have to declare that the "No capitation, or other direct tax" clause in Article I had been made obsolete by the 13th Amendment. A court that took 'originalism' seriously would uphold that.
What about jurisdiction-stripping? And while I'm personally open to the idea of court-packing, do we really think the Democratic Party is willing to go to that lengths? *Maybe* term limits.
What do you think of the judge-shifting idea that's been floated here and there? You know, the notion that you could move a judge from one court to another, as long as you don't affect their pay. Does the Constitution necessitate that a judge sit on the same court for life?
My general feeling is that there are a lot of schemes out there, and that the simplest and easiest one is to just add more judges - to the Supreme Court and to lower courts. In the longer run that's not stable and something more systematic is needed, but for now it's the best bet.
I think you have to add billionaires to your list of essential reforms. They own the major media outlets, they invest in politicians (20% of campaign contributions, and growing) and of course in Alito and Thomas. Certainly could be part of the "democracy carve out" for the filibuster, and Congress would have to declare that the "No capitation, or other direct tax" clause in Article I had been made obsolete by the 13th Amendment. A court that took 'originalism' seriously would uphold that.
What about jurisdiction-stripping? And while I'm personally open to the idea of court-packing, do we really think the Democratic Party is willing to go to that lengths? *Maybe* term limits.