Quote:
Originally Posted by nonniey
Previous changes weren't normally done for political or policy reasons, this proposal specifically would be for political reasons. If you expand the court for an administrative reason (need to to handle a larger workload) that is one thing, if you expand the court in order to get your policies enacted that is a different animal entirely. These current proposals are for the later and would destroy the court.
|
ACB's nomination was purely political. Garland's denial was purely political. Not issuing an injunction on an obviously political law that will eventually get shot down was purely political.
When we used to play nice and fair - everything was fine. Now we don't. Your side has no respect for the institution anymore and then you ask us to play nice? You reap what you sow.