I just can't buy the argument that it's needed for balance since theoretically the court is non partisan. And roberts has been very passive on the court anyway and I don't think he'll stop.

I imagine the more seasoned voter who tend to be conservative generally would be more likely to engage in politics in general , including congressional elections

In the NY case, he opted to take a more "it's not necessary to make a ruling" over "this is or isn't constitutional"

@Zuluzeit That was right on the mark! You ALWAYS have to defeat your bias! A constant struggle.

Do you think a pt comes into your office and says: "doc, I will kill myself tomorrow!"

?

He does not. He expresses concern. About the mission.

@Doc I guess not. I would be a horrible psychologist.

Not at all.

You just understood what I am struggling to get my juniors to understand.

To me it sounds like the 2 justice solution is a placation strategy over a necessity

@Zuluzeit wanna test that? Answer for Dave?

now we have a scotus discussion going on ... couldn't we put that in <#771201281024458802> ?

Zulu, I might be projecting my own concern here, but are you having second thoughts about this life?

Republicans will not pack the court though Democrats absolutely will eroding any trust in our Democratic process not only to Amercian citizens but also our dealings abroad...more bans of American think tanks, councils, forums, NGOs, ect. The world is in an era of contraction and with the dark side of US corruption exposed, a fallacy internationally as the intera aspect is now alienating. A coup in someone elses yard can always be justified, but a coup within your own ranks? Detrimental.

A balancing out to void our previous hypocrisy seems fair @inwa

@Doc Some years ago, I had a therapist dance around that very issue for like 20 minutes. Finally I stopped playing the game and just just confronted it outright. She seemed a little miffed, if anything...but maybe I was just gloating in the moment for having figured it out.

!

Packing the courts would be overdoing it @inwa

@Zuluzeit That therapist was probably either dumber or less brave than you. Very unbecoming for a therapist.

and relevant to the scotus discussion is that fact that the Democrats can only pack the court if they control both houses of Congress and the Presidency in order to change the number ... and if they might very well control both houses if Trump fanatics in GA get their way https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/26/trump-conspiracies-georgia-senate-440776

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWBPmHv9jY0&feature=emb_title

Amazing

How do you know Republicans will not pack the courts in retaliation ?

(they'd be idiots not to)

They will

I want 100k SC justices

I want to be one of them; I hear they get good perks

But if it’s “packed “ to a balance there would be less of a motivation to

meh

I disagree

well yes, there would be less

Could start a precedent to keep the court balanced

but not enough less

"well, HAL, I feel that doubt is with me constantly, and I agree that those were odd circumstances. How do you feel about this yourself?"

Also, Verily pulling from Beijing due to biologics and MindRay is like ex NSA victim shaming...a Mork and Mindy episode, actually. Nanu-nanu.

:vomit:

@Doc She was a good person. I felt bad for her for most of the year I knew her. She did help me though, for sure. I am not easy to work with. I knew when we were done. Haven't seen a therapist since then.

I don't want balance between politically motivated judicial activists and non-activists

Until someone comes along and breaks norms again @realz

the activists must go