I’m trying to figure out how to reconcile the view expressed by Charles Lane in his latest Washington Post column:
There is fury on the right over President Biden’s new commission to study reform of the federal judiciary, including expansion of the nine-member Supreme Court, a.k.a. “court-packing.â€
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) called it “a direct assault on our nation’s independent judiciary and yet another sign of the Far Left’s influence over the Biden Administration.â€
Still stewing about McConnell’s refusal to abet his challenge to the 2020 election results, and about the senator’s denunciation of the Jan. 6 mob attack on Congress, former president Donald Trump said the real court-packing problem is that McConnell is “helpless†to stop it.
What an overreaction. Yes, some on the Democratic left would love to add new justices, negating the current 6-to-3 conservative majority.
with this report from NBC News:
WASHINGTON — Congressional Democrats will introduce legislation Thursday to expand the Supreme Court from nine to 13 justices, joining progressive activists pushing to transform the court.
Is he accusing House Democrats of pure and futile partisanship?
The sponsors of the legislation are not thinking it through.
If one is going to pack the Supreme Court — don’t pack it just enough so the “correct” side has a 1 seat majority. Pack it enough so it luck/age/accidents cannot reverse it easily
The Supreme Court of India has 34 judges.
There are group dynamics reasons to keep the Supreme Court small. When groups are larger than 7 people, it becomes harder for all to participate.
That’s the genius of the Democratic plan, you can pack it, re-pack it, de-pack it, unpack it, rinse and repeat forever and no one will ever suspect you’re a bunch of opportunistic political hacks.
Stand by the constitution and everyone will see you’re just old.
There’s a bright, shiny brand new idea out there called socialism. It will solve everyone’s problems, lead to enforced racial equity and many other wonderful things and only that moldy old constitution stands in the way.
Interestingly enough; I believe the Supreme Court of India, Israel, ECJ all utilize “mini-bench” where 3 or 5 judges are selected from the full list of judges to decide a case.
There’s no constitution requirement, indeed even congressional law that each Supreme Court judge should hear every case and is entitled to a vote on every case. It is likely a power reserved to the judiciary on the procedures it employs to decide a case.