Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

317

Others were proclaiming their plans not only to retake power but never to lose it again. That means weakening the greatest single check on power: the Supreme Court. The talk of court-packing had died down after Democrats lost both houses of Congress and the White House. Now, after the elections last week, such talk is back with a vengeance.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder was telling anyone who would listen this week, suggesting that once Democrats take control, they intend to keep it permanently.

Holder explained on a podcast: “[We’re] talking about the acquisition and the use of power, if there is a Democratic trifecta in 2028.” When asked about the priority in wielding that power, Holder declared that the court was hopelessly broken and had to be fundamentally changed: “It’s something that has to be, I think, a part of the national conversation in ‘26 and in ‘28, ‘What are we going to do about the Supreme Court?’”

> Others were proclaiming their plans not only to retake power but never to lose it again. That means weakening the greatest single check on power: the Supreme Court. The talk of court-packing had died down after Democrats lost both houses of Congress and the White House. Now, after the elections last week, such talk is back with a vengeance. > Former Attorney General Eric Holder was telling anyone who would listen this week, suggesting that once Democrats take control, they intend to keep it permanently. > Holder explained on a podcast: “[We’re] talking about the acquisition and the use of power, if there is a Democratic trifecta in 2028.” When asked about the priority in wielding that power, Holder declared that the court was hopelessly broken and had to be fundamentally changed: “It’s something that has to be, I think, a part of the national conversation in ‘26 and in ‘28, ‘What are we going to do about the Supreme Court?’”
[–] • 1 pt

If republicans were smart (and actually opposed to the democrats), they'd try to pass a new amendment to prevent court packing. If it passes, great, if it doesn't, pack the court before the democrats can.

They won't do this of course because it's really a uniparty and republicans are happy to transition to open one party democrat rule.

[–] • 1 pt

They won't do this of course because it's really a uniparty and republicans are happy to transition to open one party democrat rule.

This is the real reason.

[–] • 1 pt

Reduce the number to three and make it permanent. Make it a ten year appointment and (white males) people vote after the term is up to keep them.

[–] • 0 pt

First, the White males restriction would never fly in Congress, despite how much sense it makes. Second, whatever this Congress decides as far as the Supreme Court will be wiped out by a Dem Congress once they get into power.

[–] • 1 pt

Your probably mostly right.

[–] • 0 pt

^ I am going to save this comment for posterity. ;-)