Supreme Court Watch

@spiritman Welcome to the forum!  So glad you dropped in and hope you stay.  I think you will find our community a nice home for your ideas and for support and information including visions. 

I don't think we have any visions about the future of the court. But perhaps one will arise in the future. As the issue of the courts heats up, more of us are likely to start weighing in.

I have "read" Breyer and I see he feels hugely uncomfortable with the dilemma facing him, as does his wife, who I actually knew briefly back in the day when we both worked for a think tank. For those who read the cards, I got the Hanged Man for Breyer when I asked what he was thinking, and also for his wife.  Clearly he doesn't plan to step down soon, since he has picked his clerks for next year.

Although I see he's still feeling conflicted by the pressure upon him, you don't make it to the Supreme Court so that you can fire yourself in case the country elects a Republican Senate majority and you die.  Those are two big If's. 

He's in good health. He's a philosopher king, as in the tradition of Plato who believed people should be ruled by ancient sages, and he's one of the few philosopher kings left on the court.  He loves his job and his vitality is excellent.  Ginsburg had dealt with two forms of cancer and still had valid reasons for not stepping down in 2008. 

I adore Stephen Breyer, and want him to stay on the court because he is such an amazing judge and decent human being, at a time when decency is sorely needed.

Check out this interview. It's got some interesting quotes, especially towards the end:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/q-a-justice-stephen-breyer/

My money is on Roberts, Alito or Thomas leaving before Breyer, despite the fact that they're all younger than he is. I hope this ends up being the case.

Posted by: @lynnventura

My money is on Roberts, Alito or Thomas leaving before Breyer, despite the fact that they're all younger than he is. I hope this ends up being the case.

With a wife like his -- she is a radiant open-hearted being -- he should live a long time. My cards showed him as youthful, robust, brimming with energy.

Good morning everyone, I am also new to this site, I am from Australia and basically a happy person but no psychic etc abilities to aid in predictions. I can add a different perspective I guess if thats Ok.

Regarding Supreme Court judges in Australia, it is similar in a lot of ways, they are appointed by the Governor-General and can only be removed by him on an address from both houses of Parliament in the same session, praying for such removal on the grounds of proved misbehavior or incapacity.

The main difference and if it could be bought into the American Supreme Court it might help to change things is that they must retire on attaining the age of 70 years.  

For those who may not know The Governor-General is the Queens representative and is our Head of State. He is appointed on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, usually for a term of 5 years.

Kind Regards to all

@matildagirl Thanks for posting and again, welcome to our community!  It is always helpful to learn what other countries are doing. The US has much it could do better.  

One problem with forcing them to retire at 70 is that then presidents will start appointing really young people to the court just so they can keep their party in power. That has already been happening with some of the conservative judges who in my opinion are not highly qualified but are young and will last a long time.  Some of the best judges have been in their 80's.  These people should be sages and sages take time to form. I would not want a mandatory retirement for Supreme Court judges. 

Hi Jeanne, originally they were appointed for life but in 1976 a Senate Standing Committee on Constitutional Legal Affairs asked for the retirement age to be 70. A referendum was held in 1977 on this and it was the third most popular constitutional amendment since Federation with 80% of voters in support.  As we have compulsory voting that would be roughly 80% of the voting population in Australia. 

a. The idea behind the change was to maintain vigorous and dynamic courts, which require the input of new and younger judges who will bring to the bench new ideas and fresh social attitudes.

b. The relatively high average age of federal judges does, to some extent, limit opportunity for able legal practitioners to serve on the bench while at the peak of their professional abilities and before suffering the limitations of declining health.

So their thoughts were on a different path to yours.  In our States the retirement ages vary, 65 for Magistrates and 70 to 75 for judges.

@lynnventura Thanks for sharing the link to the article about Justice Breyer (quite insightful). I hope you are correct about Alito, Roberts or Thomas retiring before him (before the midterms next year). Though if I recall reading some of the predictions here for the midterms next year (the energy can always change of course) - the GOP will struggle overall going forward because of the nightmare of the previous administration so my concern may be much ado about nothing.

I also find it interesting that the court in this most recent term ended up being more of a 3-3-3 composition instead of the 6-3 majority all of the time that was hoped for by the GOP. Not saying that Justices Barrett or Kavanaugh (who were more inclined to side with the more progressive wing of the court) will become what the GOP didn't enjoy about Justice Souter, but one can hope.

I did a card reading last year and felt that President Biden would get to nominate two justices to the Court by the end of his term (could very well have been wishful thinking since I don't read cards often) but I look forward to seeing what others here predict as the battle heats up. 

Hi everyone,. It's been a while since I've been on.  Two things: first, I want express thanks to @LauraF for the information on protest waaay back pre 2018 midterms (yeah, it's been that long).

The second thing is this - I have read that the SCOTUS has agreed to hear a case brought by the coal companies challenging the U.S. Congress's right to regulate or oversee the EPA.  I don't get a good vibe from it as the decision I believe they will give will allow a massive setback for all things environmental. 

I'd like to know what you all see happening with this. 

Is this part of our great transition (as in is this expected)?  I have been depressed the last two days after reading about it..

Can this (and other SCOTUS related predictions) be added to the next RTF?

https://mobile.twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1454166118415978505

Would Congress just ignore the SCOTUS ruling?  I know Republicans don't like judicial oversight, so could we be playing into that in deligitimizing the Supreme Court (allowing autocracy either way) by setting precidence and ignoring them?  It scares me.  We, our kids and grand kids deserve MUCH better than that.  Thanks for reading my rant :/

@rick I received clear long-term visions years back before the battle for democracy escalated to where it is today. The battle continues through much of 2020, and culminates around 2028 with two progressive women in the White House.  I received these visions from spirit. I did not arrive at them via analysis. They were simply given to me without my asking, while on a silent retreat.  

I could be wrong in the timing. But I'm certain we are moving towards a more beautiful world. It's how life evolves.  Life-force always rises up and has the last word. Hate and fear can fight against life, but then life returns and rises again. Life is fueled by love. The Right wing is fueled by fear. Love will prevail because love fuels life.

If you ever doubt this truth, then go forest bathing and ask the trees what lies ahead. 

To your question about SCOTUS: If the Supreme Court allows states to supersede the Feds' rules, and that includes SCOTUS rules, then consider that this override could cut against those Right wing companies and that Right wing court. That's why the gun lobby filed an amicus brief in the SCOTUS case against Texas. They are concerned that if SCOTUS upholds the Texas abortion ban, then blue states can ban guns and deputize citizens to enforce it. 

Here's an article about it. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/11/texas-abortion-sb8-supreme-court-kavanaugh-roberts-barrett.html

States' rights over the Federal government's rules can work in both directions and although Alito, Thomas, and  Gorsuch did not seem perturbed by this future, Barrett, Kavanaugh, and Roberts made it clear they were not comfortable with elevating states above the Feds. 

Here's yesterday's Slate story about the Texas abortion ban and the state's attempt to override federal authority.