Reminder: the Constitution does not specify the number of seats on the Supreme Court. This power was left to Congress, which set the Supreme Court's size at one chief justice and five associates in the Judiciary Act of 1789. It was legally changed seven times. (thread)
It underwent five full legal implementations:
1789-1807: six seats
1807-1837: seven seats
1837-1866: ten seats
1866-1867: nine seats
1867-1869: eight seats
1869-present: nine seats
And twice, legislation changed its size but was never implemented for various reasons, notably the Judiciary Act of 1801 (or Midnight Judges Act), which would have reduced its size to five upon the next vacancy but was repealed by the Judiciary Act of 1802.
Another attempt that was never (fully) implemented was the Judicial Circuits Act of 1866, which would have provided the next three justices not be replaced when they retire; however, only two seats were eliminated before the Circuit Judges Act altered the size to nine seats.
Contrary to the perception of many, FDR's oft-cited "court-packing" plan was never ruled unconstitutional, nor was it ever considered by the courts because the legislation never passed Congress. In fact, it didn't even get a clear up-and-down floor vote.
The primary reason behind the defeat of FDR's legislation to expand the size of the court was the general incompetence within the administration, including by FDR himself. A ton of unforced errors tanked the effort.
Democrats need to make it clear that any attempt to fill this vacancy before a new presidential administration and Congress have the authority to consider it will be met with a Democratic Congress expanding the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary at-large.
And if Republicans do move forward in filling this vacancy, mark my words: Biden will handily win the election + Democrats will take back the Senate.
We need to wield power and think creatively and stop holding ourselves to unreasonable standards that the GOP openly disregards.
The Republican Party has spent four years--and long before that to a significant degree--making a mockery of the judicial nomination process. Not just with SCOTUS but with federal seats generally.
The American people are tired of this nonsense and looking for action.
So, we'll fight any nomination made before the start of the next Congress, but more importantly: the GOP will forfeit any moral claim to a good faith process and that must be met with unyielding and intentional efforts to reform and expand our courts. /thread
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Part of our responsibility as citizens is to make those working for ICE as miserable as possible.
Not just non-cooperation but actively looking for any non-violent and legal way to increase their stress and anxiety.
(thread)
If your relative or neighbor or an acquaintance in your community works for ICE, make life hard for them.
Be difficult as possible. Be tedious. Be exasperating. Be creative in your disdain and pettiness.
Shun them socially. If they work for ICE, they don't get to be around you. They don't get invited to family gatherings. No neighborhood parties at your home. They no longer exist in your social network. They are invisible to you. Treat them like they don't exist.
You may have seen Pete Hegseth mock Sen. Mark Kelly's old U.S. Navy uniform and erroneously claim the medals are misplaced (they are not).
But that got me thinking: every military uniform is a walking resumé. Let's take a tour of Sen. Kelly's impressive career.
(thread)
First some quick background:
Sen. Kelly served in the U.S. Navy for 25 years. He commissioned into the branch out of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. He is the only graduate of USMMA to be elected to the Senate.
See that shoulder board (the black thing with gold stripes)?
That means he retired as a Captain, or an O-6. That's one grade below the admiral ranks. Fewer than 6% of U.S. Navy officers reach this rank.
I've lived in D.C. for the better part of two decades. Nearly my whole adult life. Something folks aren't talking about--a giant elephant in the room--is the amount of "brand protection" going on right now.
(thread)
I don't mean fear of Trump or political persecution, although those can overlap.
When I say "brand protection," I mean the things someone in the political arena does to preserve their career longterm. It's not even necessarily "reputation protection," which is a somewhat different vibe.
"Why should I care about U.S. Space Command being transferred to Alabama? I hate the military-industrial complex."
There are a number of reasons you should care, but you really only need one.
(thread)
An ICBM launched from Russia can reach the U.S. in 27 minutes. An ICBM launched from North Korea takes about 30 minutes; some estimates have it as low as 24 min. That doesn't mean we all get a text alert on our phones saying an ICBM is gonna hit in a half hour.
In reality, most of us wouldn't get much of a heads up at all. Because the ICBM needs to be properly identified and confirmed and reconfirmed. Then it has to be imperfectly tracked. Then agencies have to be notified. Then the press. Then the rest of us.
This is being somewhat misreported, and I think it's important to correctly frame it, so that folks don't sound clownish when they're advocating for the retirement benefits of trans service members.
The Air Force is denying *early retirement* to trans service members who have served 15-18 years and are being forced out.
As most folks know, Active Duty members of the military are eligible for retirement at 20 years. This is a separate thing from medical retirement, by the way.