General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBreyer: Expanding Supreme Court could hurt public trust
Justice Stephen Breyer on Tuesday said calls from some to expand the Supreme Court in order to dilute the current conservative majority would make the justices appear more political and damage the court's influence.
The Washington Post reports that Breyer, 82, made the remarks in a prepared speech at Harvard Law School. The justice defended the court's independence by pointing to its recent decision to decline lawsuits brought by former President Trump that sought to overturn the results of the election.
"The court's decision in the 2000 presidential election case, Bush v. Gore, is often referred to as an example of its favoritism of conservative causes," Breyer said, according to the Post. "But the court did not hear or decide cases that affected the political disagreements arising out of the 2020 Trump v. Biden election."
The court's authority depends on "a trust that the court is guided by legal principle, not politics," Breyer added.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/breyer-expanding-supreme-court-could-hurt-public-trust/ar-BB1foa9r?li=BBnb7Kz
I don't think it's going to be expanded any time soon though the number of judges has varied over the years.
RockRaven
(14,958 posts)Very, very, very, very.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)The public does not like the court as is.
I don't.
apnu
(8,754 posts)The Republicans have been focused on stuffing the court with partisans since the Bork nomination. That right there shows they have no trust in the high court. Thanks to Republican court stuffing, literally everyone else has no trust in the court now that they pulled it off.
The Magistrate
(95,244 posts)I have no trust at all in a court containing the likes of Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barret.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)We need to re-build trust by expanding the Court.
agingdem
(7,840 posts)other than Kagan, Sotomayor, and Breyer, the Supreme Court has devolved in an old episode of Night Court...I like Breyer but is he suffering from a neck condition that doesn't allow him to look to his extreme right??
CrispyQ
(36,446 posts)Repub heads would explode!
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)I'd rather keep voting in Democrats to make appointments.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Because that's some Grade A Certified Bullshit right there. The Court's decision in 2000 whisked the case out of the Florida state courts where the Gore campaign was exercising its rights under Florida law to contest the results in three counties and rendered a decision that the Court itself knew was bogus. Politics definitely won out over legal principles there as the Court bent itself to the will of the Bush campaign without any basis in the law or the facts.
But what Breyer calls "political disagreements" in the 2020 election couldn't rise to even the bogus level of Bush v. Gore. Mostly because the Trump campaign couldn't be bothered to produce any evidence to back up its whining about losing the popular vote by 7 million ballots or cite to any facts at all that supported their specious arguments.
Bettie
(16,086 posts)That's 13, then each justice has a circuit court to oversee.
Nine was the number set when there were nine circuit courts.
The Magistrate
(95,244 posts)The precedent is solid, and the number not unwieldy. Juries seat twelve, after all.
Bettie
(16,086 posts)that it is administrative rather than political.
greenjar_01
(6,477 posts)FSogol
(45,472 posts)Bush v Gore all did.
LizBeth
(9,952 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Expanding the USSC is the only thing that will restore my trust. (That, and TERM LIMITS!!)
ananda
(28,856 posts)Public trust?
Give me big fucking break!
Fiendish Thingy
(15,568 posts)Then Biden can add 6 new young justices to SCOTUS.
andym
(5,443 posts)It's good to have people like him on the Supreme Court. The history of the SC clearly points to the court as being strongly influenced by the politics of the era that justices lived. The biggest problem is that the Constitution itself is a political document, grounded in the conflicting ideas and political needs of the time of its creation, so long ago. Using it as the ultimate authority in different eras with the possibility of amending it being so difficult, has and will create problems. Of course, it's not like there is a practical alternative either. To some extent we are thralls to history and its consequences.
Goodheart
(5,318 posts)ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)And he needs to retire so Biden can replace him with someone younger right now. We can't afford another RBG situation.
MisterNiceKitty
(422 posts)Like the one in the article below:
Just a short excerpt:
"The way to save the court is to create another one. The United States should join scores of other nations, including Germany and France, and create a specialized court to decide constitutional questions."
https://lawmagazine.bc.edu/2021/01/courting-change/
roamer65
(36,745 posts)We need to get younger, more progressive justices on the court.
Hopefully Thomas and Alito kick the bucket soon.
malaise
(268,898 posts)Asking for a friend