edited...duplicate post
edited...duplicate post
From what I understand the justices are positioned to evaluate cases and determine merit. If a liberal were determine the merit if PA fraud claims, for instance, they would say there is none. I believe conservatives were assigned to swing states because they safeguard the President's right to challenge and be heard. I would guess if the situation were flipped, more liberal judges would have been assigned to protect the Democrat challenger's right to be heard. This was not a 'cram job' but simply a method of due process to assure fair and equitable results.
Ezekiel 33 (12-01-2020)
That's exactly how liberals think. If the court votes conservative 5 to 4 then conservatives are influencing the outcome. And it's a liberal vote 5 to 4 that's just the way it should be because we're right in the way we think. We need to stack the court because the way we think his main stream. Liberal thinking is the way things ought to be. Any other view than this needs to be corrected.
Ezekiel 33 (12-01-2020)
Exactly. The media ran numerous articles accusing conservatives on the Supreme Court of "marching in lockstep" when in fact it was the 4 liberal justices (when Ginsburg was still alive) that voted far more often as a unified bloc.
In their view, liberal rulings are the norm, and conservative rulings are the ones that demand apology and scrutiny.
Ezekiel 33 (12-01-2020), fuego (11-27-2020), Quest (11-27-2020)
Sure. But there were still 4 liberal justices alive on the Supreme Court for most of Trump's presidency (Ginsburg didn't croak until last month). There was nothing Trump could do about that; not like he could force them to retire.
Trump filled almost all the vacancies he could.
Quest (11-27-2020)