Subject: Re: Judges

That would give the judiciary some teeth (which I complained they didn't a few weeks ago). But Dems will have to have a veto-proof majority support to get it done. Seems unlikely until at least 2028, and I'm not sure what of the Constitution will still exist at that point

Well, the piece I read was concerning the judge's security. Judge's get threatened and violence happens more frequently than we think. I had a friend who owned a building in LA with a courtroom in it. He complained that he had to replace the bullet proof glass around the judge all to frequently - and it was expensive - cutting into his leasing profits. I was surprised. The article hinted that Trump could use the Marshall's protection as leverage, possibly withdraw protection, and judges were thinking about creating their own within the legislative branch. Thus my reference to the Swiss Guard used for the Pope. Early on the Papacy used Swiss Guards because they couldn't trust anyone else not to be compromised.

It would help with executing judge's orders, which now look like they can be ignored, especially if the contempt power is lessened by the current BB Bill.