Let Me Go On Record

I am adamant that the Supreme Court needs NO more seats.

I think it is hilarious that the Southeastern Legal Foundation — a conservative group that I am a fan of — thinks that the solution to its perceived problems is an expansion of government. The conservative solution is impeachment, not court packing. And if impeachment cannot be done, well then there is no problem other than a difference of jurisprudential opinions and that is just life.

Deal with it.

I can’t believe the Republican General Assembly would want to expand government, which is what adding two more seats to the Georgia Supreme Court would be.

11 comments

  1. drjay says:

    clearly someone will correct me if i’m wrong–but doesn’t the state constitution already make provisions for 9 justices–would this not be just filling out the bench?

  2. drjay says:

    SECTION VI.

    SUPREME COURT

    Paragraph I. Composition of Supreme Court; Chief Justice; Presiding Justice; quorum; substitute judges. The Supreme Court shall consist of not more than nine Justices who shall elect from among themselves a Chief Justice as the chief presiding and administrative officer of the court and a Presiding Justice to serve if the Chief Justice is absent or is disqualified. A majority shall be necessary to hear and determine cases. If a Justice is disqualified in any case, a substitute judge may be designated by the remaining Justices to serve.

    this is from the ga constitution right here–it seems 9 justices is already kosher and should not take much of an effort to make happen…

  3. ColinATL says:

    Just because it’s provided for doesn’t mean you should do it, drjay.

    The whole idea of court-packing still smacks of tinkering with and slanting the process to make your side/interpretation win. If you can’t win the process with your candidates, then change the process to help your candidates.

    If they really think the court needs new justices, then phase them in over time, like after the next election, to remove the impression of a party playing the sore loser. Or let the people elect the open seats rather than the governor appoint the open seats.

  4. drjay says:

    “If they really think the court needs new justices, then phase them in over time, like after the next election, to remove the impression of a party playing the sore loser. Or let the people elect the open seats rather than the governor appoint the open seats.”

    i think that would be fine

  5. drjay says:

    i have not heard a compelling case for or against it at this point–both sides reasoning appears to be “just because” at this point–but i am open to exploring the possibility

  6. LiveFreeOrDie says:

    A compelling case against it, IMHO, is $$$$. The more justices you have, the more expensive it is. I already pay enough in taxes, no thanks! đŸ™‚

  7. I’m with you on this one Erick.

    Unfortunately the powers that be will expand government & pack the courts with their cronys.

    Power ALWAYS trumps principle with “conservatives”. . . .

  8. Paul from Jefferson says:

    Come on folks. The Georgia courts have been packed with political cronies from the get-go. Rarely have we voted for people who haven’t already been appointed to fill unexpired terms. Now, however, they can be Republican hacks, too. Giving the Republicans one hundred years or so to pack the courts won’t even give them equity with past actions by the Democrats. Concerning the Roosevelt court packing, the U.S. Constitution as written at the time did not provide for additional justices. Apples and oranges!

Comments are closed.