You may be right - that's perhaps why they have to have an odd number of judges. If that's so all Roberts can do is change a conservative majority into a tie, which would only cause the liberal side to win if the lower court had sided with them (the lower court verdict stands if the Supreme Court is tied).
The whole fact that confirmation hearings are happening while the election is in progress is ridiculous. Nine months before the election was too soon, but while people are in line to vote is fine.
Why do you think some people are so eager to be free from the oppressive thumb of the ECHR? (I'm waiting for it to dawn on them that Brexit won't have any effect...)
Don't be too downhearted. We're leaving the EU, not the EC so the ECHR still has jurisdiction; and if (as your username suggests) you are also north of the border, there's about even money on us being back in the EU within 10 years (with or without the sassenach).
Step one will be to try and legislate a maximum, naturally.
No, of course it wouldn't happen but they need to at least try it.
They need to try it so that the argument is "We're trying to make things right and undo the excesses of the last few years so as to reduce the likelihood of the court becoming unbalanced again, without just increasing the size of the court again and again." If the GOP argue against it then they're basically saying "We plan to abuse the process again."
One can hope. We'll have to see if they proceed with the vote or hold off until after the election is done and dusted.
Can’t see it. Republicans have the bit between their teeth now with the Hunter Biden scandal.
You mean the one they're trying to invent?
The whole thing seems a bit suspect - Hunter took his laptop full of incriminating emails to a repair shop a year ago and forgot it there? And Rudy somehow ended up with the laptop.
