*IF* we win the presidency, the House and the Senate, the first bill to be signed . . . . .

[Stinky The Clown]

. . . . . should be one that, point by point, specifically reinstates every bill, policy, and law enacted by the US and overturned by Trump.

We can change and improve them later, as need be, but such a bill puts Trump in the shitcan, right where he belongs and right out of the gate.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. I get the point but it doesn't work that way.

Each of Trump's bad laws has to be processed separately, by repealing the bad bill and passing a new one to replace it. Same is true of administrative rules. What can be done much more quickly, however, is the rescission of Trump's executive orders, and I'm sure that will happen as soon as possible.

I think the very first thing that needs to be done is firing Bill Barr. He should be 86'd no later than COB on 1/20.

[Mike 03]

4. So glad that the EOs can be dealt with quickly!

Thank god. If Biden has to go through those one by one it could take up half his first term.

[LiberalFighter]

23. Make sure he is escorted out to the streets.

[CousinIT]

6. If Biden got a list of all administrative rules put in place in a particular gov't agency or dept

Could he boilerplate a new rule that immediately restores the rule previously in effect prior to the one put in place by Trump?

Trump even suspended all environmental regulations. His rule allowing discrimination of LGBTQ people in ACA again should be rescinded, etc. etc. Those may be two different things but I'd think staffers will be very busy collecting all the rules and exec orders Trump enacted so he can boilerplate remove them as much as possible. Laws are of course another story but there should be a list created and a plan to replace them as quickly as possible.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. No, because each agency publishes and enacts its own rules,

and the process for doing that is governed by the Administrative Procedure Act. A proposed rule, including the repeal of an existing one, has to be published by the regulating agency and reviewed before it is adopted. It can't be done all at once for all agencies.

[panader0]

11. You always have good info.

So what about executive orders? Can they be easily overturned?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

13. Yes.

Executive orders remain in force until they are canceled, revoked, adjudicated unlawful (they are subject to judicial review and can be nullified if found unconstitutional), or expire according to their terms. A president can revoke, modify, or make exceptions from any executive order.

https://www.federalregister.gov/presidential-documents/executive-orders

[BComplex]

10. Bill Barr and mitch mcconnell need to be arrested: mcconnell for RICO $$ and

Bill Barr for treason, lying to the American people, and destroying the DOJ.

[onetexan]

14. +1 K&R - corrupting the DoJ

[Kyblue1]

2. The second should increase the number of judges on each federal court

For every Bitch McConnell right wing zealot appointment there should be a qualified appointment.

[jimfields33]

5. That's been mentioned before and nice in theory but in 20 years we'll have

a thousand judges on every court because they will increase everytime a party chances. Good news is Biden will replace Reagan bush and even Clinton judges during the next 8 years.

[onetexan]

15. that would be good - the replacement of judges from past era

[forgotmylogin]

19. 20-year term limit for new judges. n/t

[onetexan]

20. Agree!!

[jimfields33]

22. That would be a good idea.

I think that is fair and even gives them time served towards a small pension. Most don’t need it but maybe that one might.

[StevieM]

18. As I wrote in response to the poster you replied to, it would be easier to simply nullify

all of Trump's appointments, by legislative action, to all bodies, including but not limited to the courts.

If they don't do that then Roe vs. Wade will be gone by next June, along with other things, like Obamacare. The GOP will simply declare anything they deem too liberal as unconstitutional by definition.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

31. Have you read the Constitution lately? You might want to check it out.

Especially Article III.

[StevieM]

34. I believe that the president and the congress have the authority

to increase and decrease the size of the court.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

35. Congress does, not the president. It would have to be done by legislation.

In 1937 Roosevelt issued a proposal to provide retirement at full pay for all members of the court over 70. If a justice refused to retire, an “assistant” with full voting rights was to be appointed, thus ensuring a liberal majority. Most Republicans and many Democrats in Congress opposed the plan and it went nowhere.

[StevieM]

36. My point is that Congress could pass legislation that enabled the reform to the courts

that I believe are necessary. The president would then sign it in to law.

I think the result would have been very different in 1937 if the court hadn't abandoned its right-wing rulings. First, Justice Owen Roberts started to vote with the conservatives less. Then there were retirements on the court.

FDR did not just grab for power, as the GOP claimed at the time, and has repeated for many years since. He felt his hands were being forced by a court that was determined to enforce right-wing dogma by judicial fiat.

Today we have that problem on steroids. If they strike down Obamacare then they are essentially saying that anything too liberal is unconstitutional by definition. At that point we are no longer a democracy, by any reasonable definition IMO.

In any event, if the roles were reversed you can be certain that the GOP would not hesitate to use legislation to alter the composition of the courts. They proved how far they would go when they not only refused to confirm Merrick Garland, but were prepared to keep his seat open for the next 4 years.

[StevieM]

17. It would be easier to simply nullify all of Trump's appointments to all bodies,

including but not limited to the courts.

[jaxexpat]

21. Do this.

If it's possible, do this and THEN triple the number of DOJ investigators/prosecutors. Look under every rug and rock. Weed out and uproot all the misbegotten outcomes, free the innocent and imprison the guilty. Give the 99.9% a chance again. Eliminate the 0.1% by wealth taxation or whatever. If that doesn't happen, all the other good won't amount to anything.
You only get one shot per 50 years. Maybe 100. Maybe never again.

[tritsofme]

24. Would it have been good in 2017 if it was easier for Trump to nullify all of Obama's appointments?

Doesn’t sound like a good idea.

[StevieM]

27. First of all, he had no need to.

The GOP was about to take control of the court without doing that.

Second, if they need to do that, at some point in the future, they will not hesitate to do so. There sense of entitlement, after Roe vs. Wade is overturned, will be off the charts.

Third, there isn't much choice at this point, IMO, because the GOP majority on the court is about to go wild after this election is over, win or lose.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

30. How, exactly, would that be done?

There's no Constitutional provision allowing for it. The Constitution gives Supreme Court justices and other federal judges lifetime appointments, which means no future president can fire them for any reason. Other appointments, such as cabinet members and other agency heads, yes, and that would happen anyhow; but not the courts.

[malaise]

3. When

Just saying - vote!

[world wide wally]

8. Something Biden could do in one day...

He could have every EO that fuckface has signed all lined up and turn them over one by one as he signs their repeals.
He can even hold them up to the camera just to rub it in.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. I hope he does exactly that.

But I want Bill Barr fired first.

[tritsofme]

25. Why would you expect him to have the opportunity?

It is customary for outgoing Cabinet officials to resign.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

28. "Customary," yes. But since when did Trump's people follow customs or norms?

There is also often a permitted period of time after the new president takes office for departing agency heads to wind up their work, pack up their offices and leave gracefully. I do not want that to happen. I want Barr's fat ass sitting in the snow on the curb in front of his old office building by 5:00 pm on January 20.

[lame54]

12. A literal bonfire of his executive orders

[George II]

16. I suspect Biden's staff is already accumulating a list ready of all of trump's executive orders....

....and as soon as physically possible Biden will rescind them or issue executive orders reversing them.

[ancianita]

26. The Second Act? Rescind Citizens United.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

29. How ya gonna do that? It's a Supreme Court decision.

[ancianita]

32. You're right, I'm not gonna do that. And it won't be a quick second thing, either. Still,

Congress can pass a new law redefining "speech," and assuming the President signs it, that could make the CU decision moot. And if it's challenged, SCOTUS can overturn it, sure. But Justice's dissents can offer new angles of challenge, however.

Still, the Supreme Court has overturned more than 200 of its own decisions. ... (CNN) As surprising as it might seem, it isn't uncommon for Supreme Court justices to change their mind. It only takes four of the nine to accept a case that revisits measurable harms done by CU.

A lot can happen in a new Democratic administration, and I'm probably wishful thinking. But new justices, expanding the court, the personal views of the justices, the justices' interactions, social forces and public attitudes, Congress and the president can have some effect on revisiting CU.

I'm no lawyer and this is just my opinion.

[Wanderlust988]

33. Biden needs to ram through every judge he can

No more Mr. Nice Guy. Schumer needs to ask (in private), every older Dem judge to retire NOW. We can sit around waiting. Things need to get done before the midterms.