Equity Stephen Breyer, who at 82 is the oldest member of the U.S. Supreme Court, verbally expressed in an interview with Slate published on Tuesday that while he intends to retire “eventually,” he has no immediate plans to do so.
Breyer remarked on his eventual retirement while responding to a question about whether he fortifies term limits for Supreme Court justices, an issue that has become a political sultry potato amid liberal frustration with the high court’s conservative tilt under President Donald Trump’s tenure.
Well, I can’t answer this question because it is too proximate to something that is politically controversial. I mean, ineluctably I’ll retire, sure I will. And it’s hard to ken precisely when,
said Breyer, a Clinton appointee.After Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s recent substantiation to the Supreme Court gave conservatives a 6-3 advantage, a number of Democrats floated radical proposals like expanding the number of seats on the high bench, kenned as court-packing.
“Expand the court,” indited Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) on Twitter in a widely shared post on Oct. 27 afore she inculpated Republicans of steamrolling over the remonstrations of Democrats, who she verbally expressed the GOP optically discerns as pushovers.
Republicans do this because they don’t believe Dems have the stones to play hardball like they do. And for a long time they’ve been veridical. But do not let them bully the public into cerebrating their bulldozing is mundane but a replication isn’t. There is a licit process for expansion,
she wrote in a follow-up tweet.The licit process for expanding the number of seats on the Supreme Court would involve the House and Senate passing legislation to that effect, and the president signing it into law. Since Republicans oppose court-packing, such a move would only be possible in the near-term if Democrats win both Senate runoffs in Georgia and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden prevails in the contested election and is sworn in on Jan. 20.
the former vice president told CBS News‘ “60 Minutes” in October. He integrated that they’ll have 180 days to come up with recommendations on how to reform the court system, because it’s getting out of whack, the way in which it’s being handled.
And it’s not about court-packing. There’s a number of other things that our constitutional philomaths have debated, and I’ve looked to visually perceive what recommendations that commission might make,
he said.Amid calls to pack the court following Trump’s push to appoint Barrett, the progenitor of the Article III Project organization, Mike Davis, told The Epoch Times that such a move would be tantamount to a “radical assault” on the judicial system.
“Court-packing is a radical assault on judicial independence,” Davis verbally expressed, arguing additionally that other conceptions floated by some Democrats, like ending the legislative filibuster—meaning lowering the vote threshold from 60 to 51 votes—and granting statehood to Washington D.C., Puerto Rico, and perhaps the Virgin Islands, could lead to a perpetual shift in the balance of puissance in favor of liberals.
Source: You can read the original Epoch Times article here.