Regarding Adding Seats to the Supreme Court

[Tony_FLADEM]

In general I support the idea that Democrats should add 2 seats to the Supreme Court to make up for Senate Republicans' dishonesty and acting in bad faith.

I'm not worried that Republicans will do the same when they get a chance because after Trump I don't think they will be in a position to control both the Presidency & The Senate for many years.

However, I do have 1 concern and that's the 2022 midterm elections. I fear that if the Democrats add seats the Republicans will be highly motived to vote and 2022 could be a repeat of 1994 or 2010.

I think the Democrats should first look for alternatives to adding more seats. You also have the fact that Alito and Thomas are in their 70's. The Democrats will be in a position eventually to appointment their replacements. Relative to the entire term of a Supreme Court Justice it's not very far off.

[Sherman A1]

1. The court has had the same number of seats since the 1800s

The nation and population have expanded greatly in that time. It only stands to reason that the court expand as well. Adding seats can I believe be sold to the public in a manner that makes sense (and as a happy accident unscrews the republican shenanigans).

[exboyfil]

2. I brought up earlier today pushing through Thomas and/or Alito

replacement before the new Congress sits.

[smb]

3. Look At The 2022 Senate Map -- The GOP Is Big-Red-Superman-"S" Screwed

The Democrats are likely to pick up a few more seats.

[Beakybird]

4. I think that they should go big.

If the Dems appoint justices that get rid of dark money and gerrymandering, the Republicans will never win back the Senate nor the presidency.

[Thekaspervote]

5. It has been suggested..a law requiring a 7-2 majority to overturn passed legislation

And term limits.

Both would dramatically reduce the politicization of the court

[Amishman]

9. I like that a whole whole lot more than adding seats

We are running a unity ticket, highly controversial moves like adding seats to the court should not be on the menu if we want to hold on long enough to settle this country down

[Demsrule86]

17. You can't make a law reigning in the Supreme Court...separate but equal branch.

Keep it simple...add four justices. We can do that legally and do it fast. Our country is teetering on a great depression.

[samnsara]

6. i think they should add 2 asap and im surprised trump et al havent tried to do it before now..

...but we have to have the senate so DONATE DONATE DONATE!

[TygrBright]

7. I prefer reducing it to 7 members. Last hired, first fired. That would eliminate.... yep, works. n/t

[alwaysinasnit]

8. I'm good with that. I came up with a hybrid plan. Increase the court size to 15, with 9 serving

at any one time, on a rotational basis. Additionally, the justices who grant certiorari are not allowed to hear that case. This might help reduce the instances of teeing up cases based on the political leanings of the justices that will hear those cases. Just a thought.

[TygrBright]

12. I like the idea of separating certiorari from the hearing panel. n/t

[Yeehah]

13. How about "no."

That is an extreme amount of power concentrated in seven people.

[Demsrule86]

16. No we need more justices.

[Kid Berwyn]

10. Adding seven LIBERALS would go a long ways to balance the scales.

Since Ed Meese first farted at the Feudalist Society, apart from cutting the taxes for the rich and destroying good governance, all the GOP has done is stack the courts.

[Silent3]

11. Without two seats stolen, we'd have a 5/4 spilt, which is a MAJORITY.

Merely adding two seats creates 6/5 split, which is still a MINORITY.

A stronger minority than we'd otherwise have, but still what could have been a liberal majority would remain stolen from us.

We'd have to add 4 seats to regain our stolen majority, or institute retroactive term limits, or other possible fixes.

As far as I can tell, adding new seats is the only easily available avenue, with everything else requiring the nearly impossible passage of a Constitutional amendment.

If we try anything of even slightly questionable constitutionality, it will be the 6/3 court deciding upon that constitutionality, or maybe a 6/5 court, and neither will likely to go our way.

[Demsrule86]

15. That is what I think too.

[Demsrule86]

14. There are no other alternatives that would work fast...and unless we deal with this pandemic,

or we will get booted out during the midterms...you saw what they did to Obama in 09...nope we need to add four justices. And we also need to expand the lower courts. McConnell stole Obama's picks...so fuck them.

[elevator]

18. Give statehood to Puerto Rico and DC.

Four more senators to get rid of filibuster and change the court.

[Blaukraut]

19. Agreed. There is no other way, even if we pay a price in the midterms.

Nothing less than democracy is on the line if the USSC is allowed to stand as is.

[peggysue2]

20. We don't know how long it will take to see those retirements

Think it will come down to whether Republicans continue their endless obstructionism and/or throwing everything to the courts for a decision. If they continue to block, even as the minority, then we're ready for a rules change and/or expansion of the courts. As Joe Biden has said the courts at the moment are out of whack and very much politicized.

[Bettie]

21. As I understand it, when they set the number at 9 we had 9 circuit courts

so raising it to 13 would be in line with the reasoning.

Frankly, I think it should be much larger, so that three panels of 7 or 9 justices can hear cases. They could be randomly placed on panels for cases.

We have a lot more population than we did when the limit was last evaluated and a lot more cases to be considered.