(06-25-2019 12:23 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(06-24-2019 11:53 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  I found your proposal interesting, and appreciate your honest attempt at improving what is going on, but it struck me that your proposal, to be implemented, assumes a relatively fair balance already exists vis-a-vis fringe decisions already made.

I don't really think my proposal assumes anything, it is purely forward-looking. Moving forward, it is an attempt to remove some of the politicization of the federal judiciary by driving Presidents from any party and a Senate with any party in the majority toward more mainstream judges. That doesn't rectify the situation already in existence ... but it helps now and should lead to larger improvements down the road.

Okay, if all things were equal, I'd be more inclined to consider your position. I don't view all things as being equal at this time. The courts have become highly politicized in a way they haven't seemed to be for some time. There have been political decisions encoded in decisions the past 40 odd years that in my opinion would need to be corrected according to the Constitution to return Constitutional balance to the courts, and then we can see about ideas for re-balancing the court itself. It's like the bank has been robbed and a mulligan is declared to start over without rectifying the injustice done.

First correct the injustice, which in this case seems to only be done from politicization of the court opposite the way it has been over-politicized the other way for several decades (which I don't view as politicizing it as much as returning the court to and rectifying its decisions in light of the Constitution, which seems to have been deviated from in the recent past too often).