The Democrats' Supreme Court Hail Mary
( I'm pleased Biden will not answer the question on this issue. Don't reveal your hand now.)
This is the progressive case for court packing in a nutshell: If your wallet is stolen, you dont forgo efforts to recover it just because it might be stolen again.
ELAINE GODFREY
5:00 AM ET
It was only a matter of time, really. Ever since Senate Republicans refused to hold a vote on Merrick Garland four years ago, progressives have argued that Democrats need to wrest back control of the Supreme Court by packing it full of liberal justices. By the Democratic primary last year, the idea had gone relatively mainstream, and half of the presidential candidates expressed openness to it. Now, in the five days since Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburgs death, calls from the left to pack the court have reached a volume that will be difficult for party leaders to ignore. Democrats have few options to try to prevent President Donald Trump from confirming his nominee, whom he plans to announce on Saturday. So theyre already gaming out how to get revenge.
If Trump confirms a new justice this year, when Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress, we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court, Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts tweeted over the weekend. Democrats at various levels of seniority followed suit, including House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York. Even Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer seemed receptive: Nothing is off the table next year if the GOP tries to fill Ginsburgs seat, he said.
Aaron Belkin, a political-science professor at San Francisco State University and the executive director of the think tank the Palm Center, is grateful to see prominent Democrats finally coming around to the plan hes spent the past year trying to advance. In 2019, Belkin co-founded the advocacy group Take Back the Court in response to Trumps appointments of Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.
The trouble for Belkin and other Democrats is their goals political feasibilityand not just because the party has to win the Senate and the White House first. Joe Biden has shown reluctance to eliminate the filibuster, which Democrats would need to do to pass a court-expansion law, and he is outright opposed to increasing the justices numbers, disinclined to take any radical action that would further exacerbate partisan tensions. We need to de-escalate, not escalate, he said during a speech in Philadelphia over the weekend. In a local-news interview last summer, he warned that Democrats would rue the day they packed the Court because Republicans would simply do the same the next time they were in power.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/democrats-case-court-packing/616446/
winetourdriver01
(1,154 posts)I'm hoping Joe will come around on this. It needs to be done. The filibuster needs to go, if not, Senate republicans will block EVERYTHING that needs to be done to clean up Shitlers piles of, well, shit.
cry baby
(6,682 posts)Increasing the number of justices is another matter. Maybe he can be convinced.
llashram
(6,265 posts)after Joe and Kamala are in office. Then I hope to see attack and engagement with the RW fascists trying to take over our democracy. No nicey, nicey shit. No civility. Just follow the law as to how it pertains to high crimes and misdemeanours and prosecute. No letting them slither back under the rocks, gutters, toilets and swamps from whence they came.
Chainfire
(17,531 posts)The time to discuss these kinds of issues is after the election. There is noting to be gained by stirring it up now. There is no reason to give the right additional energy by talking about "packing the Supreme Court." at this time. If we win the Senate, the House and the Presidency then we will have all kinds of options.
wnylib
(21,433 posts)northoftheborder
(7,572 posts)Aristus
(66,320 posts)If so, we're not going to get it.
jojog
(372 posts)When the rules are set