New Oversight Of Supreme Court Needed

[Terri]

By Doug Patton
June 30, 2008

My old boss, U.S. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, one of the few non-lawyers on the House Judiciary Committee, used to tell me about how Congress has the power to regulate the federal courts.

"Constitutionall y, we could reduce the Supreme Court to the Chief Justice sitting in his chambers at a card table if we wanted to," he would say.

I thought of that unused congressional authority as I pondered why it is that the Supreme Court tends to pull its members to the left.

In recent decades, from Abe Fortas and Thurgood Marshall, appointed by Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s, to Clinton appointees Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the 1990s, liberal Democrats are rarely disappointed in the left-wing positions of their appointees on virtually every issue. Not so with justices appointed by Republican presidents.

More

[welder4]

Enamored? it is more like covered up with stupidity. Why in the world would any sane person give habeas corpus to a enemy combatant that wore no uniform and hides behind women and children to kill our men and women in the military, are they brain dead ? Our men captured and the women also are not given even the slightest bit of consideration of the Geneva convention , as a matter of fact they torture and kill and drag our people through the streets as if they were so much garbage , Cutting off heads is another nice thing they do and I am sure any one of the prisoners at Get-mo would gladly remove an American head if they get the chance . so where is the other side in this aren't we to have a war with some rules of engagement or is that just for America., The whole head is sick and perverted 5 of them any way

[jack virtus]

if you think 4 of the present supreme court justices are bad god help us if Obama is able to select one or two supreme court justices.

[Dingbat36]

I have a dream............... ...that no issue not directly addressed in our constitution could be brought before the Supreme Court.

Sorry, guess I have a fantasy, not a dream.

[joe80x86]

I always thought we had 3 separate branches of government who were supposed to over see each other. But following this thinking we have two branches who need to remove the 3rd, great I really trust the house & senate.

[thomas]

"Perhaps this type of activity should be curtailed or banned by Congress. Perhaps the size of the court should be reduced. Perhaps John Roberts reading briefs at a card table in his chambers isn't such a bad idea."
Among the reasons Congress won't address this. 1. The votes arn't there and 2. They don have the "nads. The best we can hope for is McCain gets in and makes proper appointments.
The Old Chief

[STEELMAN]

"Constitutionall y, we could reduce the Supreme Court to the Chief Justice sitting in his chambers at a card table if we wanted to," he would say.

That might not be such a bad idea the way things are going in the SCOTUS nowadays.

What's that saying? "Too many cooks in the kitchen spoil the food?"

[makamends]

Does anyone really believe that McCain appointees will be any better than that of HW BUSH? GW can't be too happy about the Gitmo ruling of his appointees. Both McCain and Obama are enamoured with international law. Patton is rightly pointing out that our states don't have to listen to this court. The court is supreme over other courts, not the people. I don't think we should wholly neuter it, but we need to draw some lines. Louisiana people should stand up for the laws of their community. The rest of us should also through our local and federal representatives.

[yahsinger]

Is this an insight into the true nature of man? That man is not intrinsically good rather bent toward the 'dark' side. No matter how good one thinks they might be unless he disciplines his mind and soul he gravitates in that direction. There is a thing that is more harmful to man than adversity and that is prosperity, most if they do not diligently strive for the right can not handle successes and promotions very well.
Is this what happens to the SCOTUS?

[citizen1]

Response to:
New Oversight of Supreme Court Needed

The recent close call decision involving our second amendment rights, granting American’s the right to bear arms, has me asking and perhaps even suggesting that these aging Supreme Court Justices should undergo a medical “dementia” testing. I am not trying to be flip; just seriously asking if the advancing age of theses justices may have their “judgments” impaired by a common mental ailment that comes along with it?

I think they should be tested and the finding be made public; if they are found to be deficient, they need to be replaced.

Thank you.