6 ms·

He and the congress (and probably most of the country would have supported it) . There is an argument to be made that the Supreme Court was at least partially u

He and the congress (and probably most of the country would have supported it) . There is an argument to be made that the Supreme Court was at least partially usurping the powers of the legislative and executive branches to impose its political policies.

Uhhrrr 3mo ago
Before the court packing threat, they were limiting the federal government's power to regulate commerce within states. Which is a power it doesn't actually have.
- pdonis 3mo ago
  And then they reversed course with Wickard v. Filburn and said it was perfectly OK for Congress to regulate, not just commerce within a single state, but farmers growing their own food on their own land for their own use. So FDR ended up getting what he wanted anyway.
  - Uhhrrr 2mo ago
    Yes, they reversed course after the court packing threat.
- jfengel 3mo ago
  They have whatever power the Supreme Court decides they have. The Supreme Court decided that was their job, and thus far everyone has accepted it. The Court interprets the Constitution, which is vague enough to mean whatever a bare majority wishes it to mean.
  - danny_codes 3mo ago
    > and thus far everyone has accepted it For now. SC is becoming more partisan, which causes SC's credibility to decline. I assume there's a point where SC loses too much credibility and the existing system of balancing power breaks down.
hedora 3mo ago
At the time, the court was nearly as bad as currently. In other news, Alito is claiming the Comstock Act is in full force, not the narrowed enforcement we’ve seen for the last, what 100 years? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock_Act_of_1873 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock_Act_of_1873 According to that theory, they can censor mail and any other common carrier (objects and information) on moral grounds. They want to apply it to abortion pills first, but the statements made by the court imply they’ll be clamping down on “obscenities”, sex ed, political speech etc. Note that this court already overturned the right to privacy (and the 4th amendment) when they overturned Roe v Wade. That, plus mandatory age checks, porn bans, vpn bans, etc are already happening in blue and red states throughout the US. By the time 2028 rolls around, if we don’t elect a president willing to charge the current clown show with treason, we will not have a democracy in the US. Court packing would be a tragic under-reaction.

Uhhrrr 3mo ago

Before the court packing threat, they were limiting the federal government's power to regulate commerce within states. Which is a power it doesn't actually have.

pdonis 3mo ago
And then they reversed course with Wickard v. Filburn and said it was perfectly OK for Congress to regulate, not just commerce within a single state, but farmers growing their own food on their own land for their own use. So FDR ended up getting what he wanted anyway.
- Uhhrrr 2mo ago
  Yes, they reversed course after the court packing threat.
jfengel 3mo ago
They have whatever power the Supreme Court decides they have. The Supreme Court decided that was their job, and thus far everyone has accepted it. The Court interprets the Constitution, which is vague enough to mean whatever a bare majority wishes it to mean.
- danny_codes 3mo ago
  > and thus far everyone has accepted it For now. SC is becoming more partisan, which causes SC's credibility to decline. I assume there's a point where SC loses too much credibility and the existing system of balancing power breaks down.

hedora 3mo ago

At the time, the court was nearly as bad as currently. In other news, Alito is claiming the Comstock Act is in full force, not the narrowed enforcement we’ve seen for the last, what 100 years? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock_Act_of_1873 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock_Act_of_1873 According to that theory, they can censor mail and any other common carrier (objects and information) on moral grounds. They want to apply it to abortion pills first, but the statements made by the court imply they’ll be clamping down on “obscenities”, sex ed, political speech etc. Note that this court already overturned the right to privacy (and the 4th amendment) when they overturned Roe v Wade. That, plus mandatory age checks, porn bans, vpn bans, etc are already happening in blue and red states throughout the US. By the time 2028 rolls around, if we don’t elect a president willing to charge the current clown show with treason, we will not have a democracy in the US. Court packing would be a tragic under-reaction.