The Dems can't expand SCOTUS. It would require a constitutional convention to change the number of justices, and would have to be ratified by 2/3 of the states.
Yes, they can, and no, it doesn't require any ratification by the states or a Constitutional amendment. Beginning with the fifth paragraph of this link
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/packing-the-supreme-court-explained
you will find the following explanation and a timeline of the changes made in the size of the Court since 1789:
...under the Constitution, the number of Supreme Court Justices is not fixed, and Congress can change it by passing an act that is then signed by the President. Article III, Section 1, starts with a broad direction to Congress to establish the court system: “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”
A very interesting announcement is being made by the New Yorks Attorney General Letitia James who will be making “a major national announcement” today at 11:30 AM.
Hmmmm... is "the worm turning? " "is the other shoe dropping"? Will this be the "nail in the coffin" ?
I pray this will be the news that reveals Trumps link with Putin and why he has betrayed us and more... it remains to be seen tho. As always check out Heather Cox Richardson's recording of history as it happens.
Thanks to you all I have discovered Heather Cox Richardson. What a breath of fresh air! Thank you! ?
I just reas that the Attorney General has Trump financial records from the bank
NY AG Letitia James asks court to dissolve the NRA due to massive fraud and self-dealing
Does anyone know of any successful attempts at something like this? As much as the NRA needs to go, this feels to me, as a layman, as a bad precedent to set. I would have assumed they would go after the leaders of the organization that committed the fraud. I do not see how a judge would force the organization to dissolve, when a complete change of leadership would suffice at ending the problems. The Trump foundation was dissolved but it was run by a specific family, whereas the NRA is longstanding thru many different variations of leadership.
I don't know how commonly its used, but NY law allows for the AG to request judicial dissolution of a company if the company "carried on, conducted or transacted its business in a persistently fraudulent or illegal manner, or by the abuse of its powers contrary to the public policy of the state." Other states have involuntary dissolution statutes that don't require judicial intervention.
https://law.justia.com/codes/new-york/2014/bsc/article-11/1101/
Thank you - apparently I was misinformed.
If that's the case, I think we should have 13 justices, an odd number and good luck to boot, and they should not be lifelong appointees, but I think reasonably they could have 20 year terms. Also, an age limit.
Another reason to win back the Senate...
@laura-f I agree about term limits, but unfortunately, that part *is* hard-coded into the Constitution in Article III, Section 1 where it says "...shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour...", which means that unless they commit an impeachable crime, they're in for life or until they leave voluntarily. Changing that would definitely require an amendment.
And the law strikes again!
As many of you know, Ms. Jean Carroll, a columnist in New York, has a defamation lawsuit against the Predator in Chief, claiming that he raped her in a dressing room at the department store Bergdorf Goodman about 25 years ago. She filed a motion asking for a sample of his DNA (she had the foresight of keeping the dress she was wearing at the time of the incident) to prove that she is telling the truth. Trump sought to delay the case saying that he was immune so long as he was President.
The judge ruled against him. So Ms. Carroll can get Trump's DNA.
Will she get it before the election? I don't know, but it may serve as an "October surprise" if the DNA sample matches. Remember, Trump denies having any contact whatsoever with Carroll. So if he is forced to give a sample and it matches, he is a liar at best and a rapist at worse.