Franklin D. Roosevelt aimed to pack the Supreme Court with judges who would support his New Deal policies. In 1937, he proposed the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill, which would allow him to appoint an additional justice for each sitting justice over the age of 70. This plan was met with significant opposition and ultimately failed, highlighting tensions between the executive branch and the judiciary regarding New Deal legislation.
Does this evidence support what I am trying to say
Judges have a lot of discretion about retroactive support. I would definitely raise this as a defense.
A president is more likely to appoint judges who would agree with him ideologically, and therefore, would be opposed by his ideological rivals in the Senate.
The judges like at me when I was dacing.
It would totally depend on the game you are trying to play. If they have a technical support, try to contact them.
I would support the ethos of the school by consistently modeling its core values through my actions and interactions with students, staff, and the community. I would actively engage in school activities, contribute positively to the school culture, and uphold the mission and vision of the institution in all that I do.
If a business is trying to abide by Affirmative Action Laws, which of the following would be acceptable by the Supreme Court?
no, but I would like to know if she's trying to. Message me.
The institution of marriage has existed for centuries as a social and legal union between partners.
That answer would be...Judges!!
The biggest advantage to electing judges and justices is that they would be accountable to the people. However, the disadvantage would be subjecting them to political influence and pressure.
The judges would might behave with violence and oppression if it were joined to the executive power.