Someone needs to brush up on the constitution. Congress doesnt vote on an amendment. A constitutional convention is convened (there are rules on how this happens). An amendment is proposed, debated, finalized, re debated, then voted on. If the vote carries yes, it is then added to the constitution. Would take a long time, and a shitton of people these days to be on board to even get a convention seated.
Which is irrelevant because it wouldn't take a constitutional amendment to pack the court. The Constitution doesn't give a number of justices. It empowers congress to "from time to time ordain and establish" the Supreme Court and lower courts.
So adding justices and creating districts just takes normal legislation.
A voters knowledge of the constitution is irrelevant? Welcome to 2020 frens.
Op wouldnt be begging for an answer if op already knew the answer. We need to educate ourselves better and quit begging others online like the left with their talking heads on the tube.
Final question of the op:" Would Congress have to vote on an amendment?"
I was not speaking toward the answer. I was speaking to the lack of knowledge on constitutional amendment procedure.
Congress can propose an amendment, but as you say, is powerless to ratify. That must be done by the states, either through their legislatures or in convention.
But as for the number of justices, that is not in the Constitution - the number 9 exists by common law. So it can be changed by an act of Congress - no amendment is necessary.
Someone needs to brush up on the constitution. Congress doesnt vote on an amendment. A constitutional convention is convened (there are rules on how this happens). An amendment is proposed, debated, finalized, re debated, then voted on. If the vote carries yes, it is then added to the constitution. Would take a long time, and a shitton of people these days to be on board to even get a convention seated.
Which is irrelevant because it wouldn't take a constitutional amendment to pack the court. The Constitution doesn't give a number of justices. It empowers congress to "from time to time ordain and establish" the Supreme Court and lower courts.
So adding justices and creating districts just takes normal legislation.
A voters knowledge of the constitution is irrelevant? Welcome to 2020 frens.
Op wouldnt be begging for an answer if op already knew the answer. We need to educate ourselves better and quit begging others online like the left with their talking heads on the tube.
No, the process to amend the Constitution is irrelevant to the question of how to pack the courts because that doesn't require an amendment.
Final question of the op:" Would Congress have to vote on an amendment?" I was not speaking toward the answer. I was speaking to the lack of knowledge on constitutional amendment procedure.
Congress can propose an amendment, but as you say, is powerless to ratify. That must be done by the states, either through their legislatures or in convention.
But as for the number of justices, that is not in the Constitution - the number 9 exists by common law. So it can be changed by an act of Congress - no amendment is necessary.
Correct; To the point of the op. My point was for op to educate himself, as we should all have been doing everyday since we learned to read.