One of the many upsides to Donald Trump winning the election last night is the fact he gets to nominate more SCOTUS Justices. This writer (jokingly) thinks he should mess with the Left and say he's embraced their idea to end the filibuster and expand SCOTUS so he can name more justices just to watch the Left lose their minds.
They won't do that, but with Alito, Thomas, and Sotomayor nearing retirement age, Trump has the ability to shape the nation's highest court for the next several decades.
And the Left knows it:
Btw, we're going to have a 7-2 SCOTUS for the next 40 years. Any hope of any progress in civil rights or in progressive policy is completely and utterly dead.
— Justin (@jdabre11) November 6, 2024
The solution here is to pass those policies through the legislature, according to Constitutional parameters, rather than rely on the courts.
But they won't do that.
We all know why.
Hmm, if only there were a way to do it legislatively rather than through the courts.
— Utah Conservative (@coninutah) November 6, 2024
Like we said.
Yay. The Constitution is safe.
— Bleu Cheque (@VERBAL_CHANCLA) November 6, 2024
And the Left are so mad about this.
That’s judicial activism and not the role of the Supreme Court. Their only role is to rule on the constitutionality of laws. And can you tell me any rights that are available to me that aren’t available to every other American?
— Ian the Gringo Gorilla 🦍 (@Gringorugger8) November 6, 2024
Recommended
They cannot.
You are directly saying that you want judges to enforce progressive policy. Shouldnt policy be decided democratically?
— Jonatan Pallesen (@jonatanpallesen) November 6, 2024
It should be.
The fact they can't get their policies passed through the legislative process says a lot about those policies, none of it good.
What right don’t *you have? What progressive policy do *you need?
— Jay’V (@JayVTheGreat) November 6, 2024
He has the same rights as every American, and there's no progressive policy that he needs.
America will be forced to endure judicial rulings that are consistent with the our governing principles, as outlined in the US Constitution.
— American Made (@Brain_Pwr) November 6, 2024
The horror.
https://t.co/Pnx4mf9opk pic.twitter.com/zmdxV4QOfG
— GregTheTool™️ (@GregTheTool1) November 6, 2024
This made us laugh out loud.
Policy is enacted by the legislative body. God damn, public schools are a dismal failure. https://t.co/6UqT7gAP3c
— 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐠 (@HarmfulOpinion) November 6, 2024
By design.
This is a bonkers idea, but maybe try legislation for policy instead of ramming your social agenda through the courts?
— 5% NaCl (Salty) (@TwoRulesOfWar) November 6, 2024
I know it’s hard to understand this basic civics concept but you do still live in a republic. https://t.co/nBaVCzpvjv
What a radical concept.
are you telling me that the modern civil rights paradigm, established on the back of decades-long liberal control of the nation's highest court (contrary to popular will), can be reversed once that court becomes conservative? https://t.co/AWmz5jXtMT
— Milk Truck Driver (@realcentrist404) November 6, 2024
Funny how that works, huh?
I really liked the idea some people proposed of boosting the court by 4 justices, an 11-2 SCOTUS sounds better. https://t.co/lypCHuxeuN
— Drew (@fivegeedubya) November 6, 2024
Sounds good to us.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member