Expanding the Supreme Court, Explained | NowThis
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ต.ค. 2020
- Here’s everything you’ve been wanting to known about ‘packing’ the Supreme Court, from the guy who literally made the documentary on it.
» Subscribe to NowThis: go.nowth.is/News_Subscribe
» Sign up for our newsletter KnowThis to get the biggest stories of the day delivered straight to your inbox: go.nowth.is/KnowThis
For more SCOTUS news, U.S. politics, and 2020 election coverage, subscribe to NowThis News.
#SCOTUS #Politics #Election #News #NowThis #NowThisNews
Connect with NowThis
» Like us on Facebook: go.nowth.is/News_Facebook
» Tweet us on Twitter: go.nowth.is/News_Twitter
» Follow us on Instagram: go.nowth.is/News_Instagram
» Find us on Snapchat Discover: go.nowth.is/News_Snapchat
NowThis is your premier news outlet providing you with all the videos you need to stay up to date on all the latest in trending news. From entertainment to politics, to viral videos and breaking news stories, we’re delivering all you need to know straight to your social feeds. We live where you live.
/ nowthisnews
@nowthisnews
Mitch's smirk just gives me a horrible shudder down my spine 🤐🤐🤐.
Moscow Mitch is doing Putin's bidding.
And so is Conald trumpski, EFFING TRAITOR.
China Chuck is doing Marx's bidding.
It's nothing so exotic as that. He's doing the bidding of his corporate owners (as most of Congress does). The corporations are in control. Russia and China just happen to like it because it makes us weaker.
I like how they beautifully lays out the end of the legitimacy of the American judiciary. You can create seats to balance means others can create it too. I like how he brings up political issues like he knows he needs the court to push legislation.
From The Notorious RBG to 3Pac.
From Ruth Traitor Ginsburg to AC/BC.
@@Barrobroadcastmaster Not clever. Sorry, You loose.
@@RobertManzanilla You lost the Supreme Court. I'll take that as a win. RUTHLESS
@@Barrobroadcastmaster your president will lose badly in 11 days. + Blue Senate. Enjoy your brief moment.
@@RobertManzanilla We have the majority in most legislative chambers in this country. Over 2/3. And the SCOTUS is on lock. Have fun getting nothing done.
Wow! This was so informative! This needs to go viral!
It's so crazy to me that it only requires a simple majority of Senators to select a Justice. That's not even the case for POTUS and at worst we only have to deal with them for 4 years. It's also crazy to me that politicians can have partisan views in a role that seems like it should require objectivity. I think we can solve this by requiring a 2/3 Senate confirmation or more, this would ensure Justices are only being selected that both sides of the aisle can agree on.
Agreed on all points, but also there has to be much much shorter term limits. Lifetime appointments are ridiculous.
@@talimn
Lifetime appointments serve a purpose.
@@talimn I agree and I think that should be time limit for senators and congressmen.
@@am.3896 same.
@@avishevin1976
Lifetime appointments make them almost like kings.
That is unacceptable.
One of the better Now This videos. Not saying that the others are bad, which they are absolutely not, but this guy was just clear and concise, yet detailed enough to learn a lot in 7 min.
the problem is that expanding the court will give the justification for the next GOP to do the same
Still, if they can pass voter protection laws, automatic registration etcetera. The GOP will have to drastically change its direction. The majority of people is not that reactionary. Watch Biden leading and getting numbers up in every poll. The republicans have lost the popular vote everytime. If they want to win they will have to stop the attacks on democracy and minorities.
When dems start saying "the problem.." that's the problem because republicans see no problem doing whatever.
That’s assuming they wouldn’t do it anyways. As the professor stated, they were planning to do it already when they anticipated Trump would lose to Clinton.
@El Ohwell Google is your friend.
@@valdavis7461 Google isn't anyone's friend
If ever there was a country on a downward trajectory it is the US.
The GOP have been, at least, derelict in their duty to protect our delicately balanced democracy. That demands an accounting. A rebalancing
OLD LUKE vote
If the system worked, Obama's appointment would have had a vote. The GOP proved we need to change the system. I want to see Puerto Rico and DC become states!
@Richard Ogura No, you're right, we should TOTALLY ADD THOSE DEMOCRAT VOTING territories. Thank you for pointing that out.
@Richard Ogura Statehood for all!!!!!
@Richard Ogura
You’re right, all territories that want statehood should get it.
@Richard Ogura
PR doesn't want to be a state. At least that's the way they vote every time it comes up. Are you going to force it on them? Sounds fascist to me.
@@avishevin1976 after Trump's awful handling of the federal response to Puerto Rico's hurricane damage, I suspect they will want statehood. Ask them to vote and, if it passes, make them a state!
I'm from Chile, and in here Supreme Court judges can serve until they're 75 years old, and then they've got to retire. The only time we had justices that stayed during their lifetime was when Pinochet was in power. I don't understand why can't you impose term limits on them.
Term limit justices for 20 years. That's a fair number. No one should have a lifetime appointment in a democracy.
20 is too long still.
They could just do what Maryland does, which is that Judges can only work until age 70, and then are required to retire.
I say 15 ,tops!
The Supreme Court- nor any other Institution for that matter- should have unbridled power for the entire productive lifetime of any single generation and that's basically what we have -particularly since the Republicans have made it their mission to completely overthrow the institution!
At one point in Maryland date had a program called Adopt A Highway where private businesses would have their name put on it as the organization that help to keep it maintained. But when the KKK decided they wanted to 'Adopt A Highway', then-senator Barbara Mikulski, decided it was time to make alterations to prevent the Riff Raff from exploiting it.
It seems the Supreme Court has reached that point as well!
@@shannonmcdade9130
I live in Maryland. I didn't realize that- thanks for the info.
@@mattrussillo4587 Yeah. It's true across the state for the Court of Appeals, Court of Special Appeals, Circuit Courts, and District Courts. It's true that, especially at the Circuit Court level, Judges retire at 70 and then may be used to help out in the court to cover dockets as "retired judges", especially in places where dockets are backlogged (think Baltimore City). But they aren't full time and their spot is replaced after their retirement. But on the COA and COSA, those Judges are placed by appointment, but are required to retire at 70, meaning whoever is in office as governor at the time appoints their replacement.
That guy put in a lot of information there. Learned a lot.
I absolutely cannot believe why the court justice have to be a life time. That creates a load of problems.
It shows how stupid it is when you listen to this. The problem is will this ever change?
I am a Democrat, blue through and through, and I approve this message.
Time for term limits and ellected judges
yess please!
That would be inviting insanity.
Judges are not elected so they don't have to run campaigns. Campaigns are expensive and you end up beholden to your supporters. Judges are not supposed to represent anyone.
Judges are appointed for life so that they can be politically-incorrect without suffering for it. That grants them political independence relative to the administration that put them there, because they won't ever have to look for another job, if they don't want to.
@@avishevin1976 if Judges arent supposed to represent anyone, they have NO BUSINESS being judges. They should represent the views of people of America, not be beholden to the president like this particular appointee is.
@@talimn
No, they aren't supposed to represent anyone or any group. They are supposed to interpret the law. It is up to the legislature to represent the people and enact laws that benefit them.
NOOOOOOOOO
OK
look
that would be nuclear
the entire point of life long is to abstain SCOTUS from politics
1 Political minor scheme should not be replaced by a nuclear one
Let's please stop using the word conservative to replace the proper term- 'backassward'!
The judges should have a term limit.
If a president can't have a life time ruling so can't a judge. Especially at the congressional level. These need to rotate every 8-10 years
NOOOOOOOOO
OK
look
that would be nuclear
the entire point of life long is to abstain SCOTUS from politics
1 Political minor scheme should not be replaced by a nuclear one
@@junepark1256 how exactly is lifelong abstaining from politics?
After being a colony for over 400yrs.. I’m ready to be counted as a sovereign citizen ;~;
Any real change that is made is made in the courts. This is why this nomination is so important.
Nomination is useless if the GOP has the senate majority now. If they (the GOP) refuse to abide by the rules neither should the democrats.
0:28
If this is not the evil laugh, then what is?
Mitch got that caved in jack-o-lantern type of face
Thank you for this. The only problem is that the only people that are listening aren't the ones that need to hear this! The ones that need to hear this will simply choose not to.
EXACTLY
What are the names of the music tracks in this video? Anyone know?
3:40 does that not in effect subvert an entire branch of government?
What? Adding states? We started with 13 and now we have 50. If that's what you mean, there's no credible argument for it subverting anything. But for sure, adding states has always been a political battle precisely because it affects the balance of power. But that didn't stop us the other 37 times. It's all just part of the regular flow of politics. Ultimately the goal as I see it is to restore our lost democracy and push to continue to make our country more democratic over time. (Plus, citizens in DC *_deserve_* full representation, which they don't now have because of lack of statehood. And before you say it's too small: DC has more people than Wyoming. And likewise, Puerto Rico deserves statehood if they want it; though I'd also be happy for them to have independence, if they want that.)
@@sharonminsuk no. Altering a court to respond one way or the other to legislative or executive action.
I get why it has to happen. I just dont like its spirit.
@@sharonminsuk also, I'm all for DC & puerto Rican statehood (Guam too)
@@LuchadorMasque Oh, *_that._* You mean, does it subvert the court? Well... maybe, but probably no more than it ever did. The justices are still free to rule as they please. In a world where politicians actually valued, and fought for, an independent and nonpartisan court, they would fill the seats that way, and justices would all be centrist or they would be all over the map, and we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. But I don't think we've ever lived in that world. It has been political from day 1. I recently read that the late 20th century may even have been less political than typical, so we've been living in an era that has made us spoiled and raised our expectations, but that now it's reverting back to normal. I don't see any way around this, in a system where the justices are appointed by politicians.
Great video, top notch
Dems must follow his logic and implement them
I mean 13 districts SHOULD match 13 justices, I mean you could
Go further and make sure there are always 6 liberal, 6 conservative, and one independent/moderate to keep our justice system fair and JUST!
More people need to see this! Great!
Wow this is disgusting. I can't believe they're defending court packing...
If you do all of that the people(not just the militias) will come on the street with guns to unseat those cronies before the second amendment is gone and don't expect the military to protect such tyranny.
The Supreme court has had 9 judges for the past 150 years....150 yrs ago the American population was about 38 million...now it is 330 million which means it is time to expand the courts! It should represent all Americans not just a select few!
So i am curious to what number do you want to expand it? About 90 judges since the population grew almost 10 times? And why does the supreme court need to represent the american population? As far as I am aware theyre job is to look at laws and if they are in line with the constitution or other laws.
@@ruben-4150 yes and as it should represent all Americans, it needs to grow - to which point needs to be determined by both parties - but it needs to represent the young generation and white & black Americans, Americans of Hispanic & Asian decent and native Americans!
@@surfinganonymously so you want to put quotas on it after you expanded the amount of seets and not just a few of very capable justices?
This is just crazy the way you try and justify this insanity, and reading the comments is just scary
@Hanz Zimmer considering the left wing media shelters these people from any view that breaks the narrative and shields then from any truth.
there's also that the POTUS Office can call for an article V (convention) on individual issues.
00:28 Emperor Palpatine is that you?
Hey Canada I would like to apply for citizenship. I will renounce all my ties to the States and bring with me enough money to invest in the local economy and buy property.
Very interesting.
Until now, the US had the appearance and shades of democracy, now, it's barely a husk that.
Could you please edit your description to let us know WHO this guy is?? I'm having trouble googling him when all I have is "guy" to go off. Thanks in advance.
If your talking about the guy explaining stuff there’s a label at the start of the video saying “Aaron Belkin”
Beautiful
The GOP (Republican party) literally means "Grand Old Party" ..... that's just ironic.
We don't need to expand the court. The constitution says the justices may sit while in good behavior. Recent acts were NOT good behavior. Impeach them.
When people wear glasses but look above their lenses 100% of the time lol and no, it’s no because he’s wearing bifocals
He is very smart, well said.
If you expand the court, just be prepared a few years down the road when some other president decides that Texas can have 12 senators rather than 2 or that they just aren't really feeling the whole "freedom of the press" thing.
Well expanded
"This court votes in the direction that is favored by Republican donors," after specifically talking about Chief Justice Roberts. Yeah, that's why he voted that Obamacare was legal amongst many other decisions he has made. It's because he's in the pockets of Republican donors and must do everything they say even if it goes against written law and the Constitution.
Have 100 supreme court judges who are randomly picked for cases. If you wish make it non-life terms. By having judges who are selected by a political party you completely undermine the independence of a judiciary and the separation of powers which is crucial for democracy.
(Speechless)
Scrap the electoral college, have proportional voting for the senate & take the justice system out of politics . Finally make voting compulsory , with every person registered to vote.
@Dragon1717
The Electoral College disenfranchises millions of voters just by its very nature. It allows a minority of states to control the outcome of presidential elections. What's wrong with having a direct vote for president? No other member of the G-7 or The E.U. runs elections this way. You win a polarity of the vote and your the elected head of government for however long the your term may be.
@Dragon1717
They already are. But, one can assume that the idea that a mere 5 or 6 states determine the outcome of a presidential election just sailed right past you.
@Dragon1717 lol when is the last time a candidate went to places like Wyoming and Montana? Candidates only Campaign in swing states and their presidency is largely tailored made to help swing states so they can get reelected leaving smaller states out of the loop.
Honestly, I actually think it makes more sense to have more justices on SCOTUS. They are weighing in on really important cases and I think it’s better to have a larger pool of people to vote. IMHO
the problem is that expanding the court will give the justification for the next GOP to do the same
SHARE WITH EVERYONE !
The Senate has denied Presidential nominations several times with the reason that the President would be departing soon. Tyler attempted to push through three Justice nominations in his final year of office; John Spencer, Reuben Walworth and Edward King. Fillmore took the same route and tried to push through George Badger and William Micou. Buchanan unsuccessfully attempted to install Jeremiah Black. Henry Stanberry was the last to be rejected in 1866, until Merrick Garland in 2016.
I would also like to point out that the court has been partisan since its inception and has historically leaned conservative. What we have experienced in the last four years is a massive shift to the right, and what this guy is suggesting is swinging the pendulum as far back in the left as it will go. This isn't balance; this is escalation which will not end well for anyone. The Supreme Court should be a non-partisan and unbiased institution concerned only with interpreting the framework of the constitution in the spirit it was written. Barring, that, an enforced balance between the two political parties and the addition of a check against institutional finality and how the court can interpret new laws is the best solution you can hope for.
I still don't get it. Lmao. So much for my higher education... I guess...
Time to pack the court
Dismantle the corrupt court.
100% correct!!
Wow!!! This was a dynamite video.
Well isn't this depressing
Supreme Court has been expanded since the 1800s
Don’t expand the court! If you expand the court this administration, the next one will do the same. We don’t need a judicial arms race!
Exactly. If the democrats had the control of this for sometime, this country wouldn't have been divided as they are now.
Obama was in control for 8 years and donald trump happened. He was a democrat and divided the country apparantly
Time to share this ad nauseum!!
Imagine having ideological judges and even justices. Wtf America.
This is pure idiocy. The role of the court is to judge whether laws are constitutional or not. Not to rubber stamp things you think are good and block things you think are bad. If you want to do something the constitution does not allow, amend the constitution. But that requires convincing people and you’d rather cheat by appointing judges who will ignore the constitution in favor of your preferences.
The right didn't pack the court. There is a difference between filling or not filling a seat when it's open and create new seats.what would prevent the GOP from creating new seats when they take back the government at some point. Don't tell me this BS that somehow demographic change will never give us a GOP government. We said that in 2008.
Mitch McConnell: *"They won’t change these judges for a generation."*
Mitch McConnell: "A lot of what we’ve done over the last four years will be undone sooner or later by the next election. *They won’t be able to do much about this for a long time to come.”*
Mitch McConnell: “I _saved the Supreme Court for a generation_ by blocking President Obama’s nominees and _led the way for Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh."_
Mitch McConnell: "One of my proudest moments was when I looked at Barack Obama in the eye and *I said, ‘Mr. President, you will not fill this Supreme Court vacancy.’”*
Mitch McConnell: *“I’ll tell you why. I was in charge of what we did the last two years of the Obama administration.”* response to *"I was shocked..President Obama left so many vacancies and didn’t try to fill those positions."* (Sean Hanitty)
well that made me feel hopeless ..oof
I'd add a fourth amendment to the Supreme Court system: no more lifetime appointments. There is no reason for our system to have any appointments that last for a generation as appointed by essentially one person. If they want to keep that, then Supreme Court Justices should be elected by the entire country.
This is totally different, but listen what if we had in the Senate of one state one republican senator and one democrat senator.
Who is this speaker?
0:06
Me, a trans person:
Oh. Wait. This video is about the supreme court. My bad.
And get rid of the electoral college and go with the popular vote.
At the moment the US Republicans are similar in parts to the ways how United Russia administration reigns their country. That's pretty for any and every democracy choosing this route.
I like this idea for democrats to increase the cap of justices to 29 but only allow the president to nominate 3 justices per term. this way they balance the court in the present but allows the republicans to add more members to the court if they win the next election. this will also make it impossible for old ideologies to dictate the new ones and vice versa.
lol scotus has been ultra liberal ever since the 50's when fdr just kept running and wouldnt step down. thats how the pendulum swung so far left and now by an act of god its going back the otherway and I expect it to be far right for the next 70 years. thats how it works buddy. the nfa, gca, awb, ect is all on the table now
3:17 Uh no I dont want majority rule I want the constitutional rule
God help us
I’m 17 and need a job beacuse of are country’s down fall I would gladly love to help the American people
Which country?
Unused states I just feel like I ain’t got no purpose I just want something that has solid meaning
@@jaydem3624 Programming/AI/Cyber security is one of the best fields to get into where your skills are transferrable and all of the needed resource are online. You can work anywhere in the world with an internet connection. Plus, if you are hispanic, US companies will favor you when hiring.
I tried liking twice
The court has desired an expansion to cover it's increased work load , time to give them their due .
the problem is that expanding the court will give the justification for the next GOP to do the same
@@drwalka10 - That may be true, but if the court is not re-balanced now, the GOP won't NEED to expand the court in order to continue their utter domination of the majority by the minority. Doing nothing is not a valid answer.
@@AndrewSBaker yall wouldn't be crying wolf if the Supreme Court were unbalanced toward liberal judges. End of story
@@drwalka10 - that's certainly an opinion you're entitled to, but that's all it is. If we're going to have a group of men and woman that get to be the final say on all critical matters, then there should be a modicum of fairness and balance in the makeup of that court. Unbalance in either direction delegitimizes the court and undermines justice.
So, I neither want the court severely tilted to the left nor to the right.
And worse yet, it was blatant cheating that was employed to shift it precipitously to the right. So, that might sound like whining to you, but it is merely a call for justice.
Because EVERYONE loses with an unbalanced court, except those in power.
@@drwalka10 It's not good for the court to tilted too much to the left or right. At least in 2015 the court was ideologically balanced. Kennedy was the middle of the court and showed liberal and conservative justices to work together. Today's court is illegitimate. You can't have three justices on a court that received a combined THREE votes from one party. Plus Alito and Thomas were barely confirmed.
Let's keep it as is
If anything,let's kick out the 3 Liberals
And have all 9 Conservative Justices
I bet Mitch didn’t intend this would be a possibility. Also make DC and Puerto Rico a state.
WHAT IS HIS NAME? WHAT IS THE DOCUMENTARY? Now this you fail at the most basic reporting.
The court will solve these issues with thoughts and prayers ☁️ 🙏
I hate be cruel, but looks like you're damned!
I could listen to this man speak forever
...it's how we scam...
Vote for a better Future for the USA. VOTE Progressive Dems like AOC, Bernie Sanders and Katie Porter into office
Who is here after Roe V Wade was overturned
And the funny thing is: they call others communists xD sorry but it's funny from the outside perspective that the self proclaimed "land of the free" isn't so free anymore ^^
The Confederate Supreme Court of America. Democrats should add 3 more judges and make it an even 6-6. This will help bring some level of public trust in the court.
the problem is that expanding the court will give the justification for the next GOP to do the same
@@drwalka10 Judge Garland should have gotten a fair chance. I'm tired of Democrats playing by the rules and norms and Republicans do whatever they want. This is the 21st century not the 17 & 1800s. The constitution must speak for all Americans not just Confederate (conservative) americans.
@@drwalka10 Republican don't need a justification to do anything lol. They will do whatever benefits them regardless of the rules or norms. Also if they expand it even more than great it just make the Supreme Court look like a sham and lose and sort of legitimacy in the eyes of the citizens.
@@JohnDoe-sw1sm With 6 Republicans it already is a sham.
As of today, we f'd af
America the land of the free........................ ish!
I watched your entire video waiting fir one fact. Never happened.
Expand the Court but force the Democrats to live that Life. And see how many repent
I just love how the tone is: hey to make sure the system is fair, we need to have more of MY politicians in power and less of yours. Just a power grab
I hope Joe Biden and Kamala Harris see this video.
In addition to the 3 things Democrats need to do if they win the WH and Senate. They also need to establish term limits for the Supreme Court (including the justices currently serving)
Muah ha ha ha 🤖. Stupid turtle