Let's be perfectly clear what these tantrums are all about: Leftists feel entitled to power, and when they don't have it, they pronounce any institution or process standing in the way of their power to be 'broken' and in need of 'reform.' We see this phenomenon on smaller matters, as well, but progressives are unafraid to gun for big targets, too -- from the electoral college, to the US Senate, to the Supreme Court. There would be zero discussion of altering or expanding the High Court if everything had gone according to plan. Hillary Clinton was supposed to win in 2016. She was supposed to replace Justice Scalia with a Leftist. Republicans weren't supposed to have an opportunity to turn Democrats' decades-long project of self-interested power grabs against them, to great effect, and use Democrat-established precedent to fill judicial vacancies in record numbers, including three SCOTUS seats in four years.
None of that was in the script. But that's what happened, thus unleashing the latest norms-shattering efforts to destroy our constitutional order, pushed by the people who feigned reverence for norms and the constitution during the last presidency. This is a conniption fit from people who believe power is their birthright and who pursue it with ruthless abandon. That's how conservatives filling existing vacancies, aided by previous Democratic machinations, is being preposterously rebranded as "court packing" -- and while actual court-packing is being framed as "court unpacking:"
NADLER: "We're not packing the Supreme Court, we're unpacking it" pic.twitter.com/LQJyzVpYem
— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) April 15, 2021
Is the radical new scheme unveiled yesterday to add four seats to the Supreme Court bench, which would give Democratic-appointed justices a 7-6 advantage (subtle!), likely to become law? No. At least not anytime soon. President Biden is no longer passionately inveighing against court-packing, preferring to punt the issue to a blue ribbon commission, a DC kiss of death. He wants to give the appearance of movement on that front without actually doing anything. But make no mistake: He is normalizing this dangerous idea by even indulging that he's personally called a "terrible mistake" borne of corruption. So is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who declared the new bill "not out of the question," while downplaying the chances she'd bring it up for a vote. In an era of falling public confidence in American institutions -- though not in the Court, I should add -- legitimacy-destroying ideas like this should be forcefully rejected. The American people strongly oppose court-packing, but Democrats' wild-eyed, insatiable base loves the idea. Republicans should press for floor debates and votes in each chamber. Senate Democrats don't have the votes to amend the legislative filibuster, let alone add SCOTUS seats, but they should all be made to cast votes, on the record.
Press releases stating opposition, vague comments about 'other priorities,' or radio silence aren't good enough. Dozens of Senate Democrats signed a full-throated defense of the legislative filibuster just a few years ago, and nearly all of them have now flip-flopped on that issue, even though their party has been the exclusive practitioners of filibuster "abuse," as they now call it, in the interim. Talk is cheap. Power is tantalizing. Put them on the record with votes. Pelosi and her Senate counterpart would probably prefer to spare vulnerable members the uncomfortable position of alienating either most of the electorate, or their hardcore base, so we likely won't see the legislation taken up. But Republicans should press the issue. Fighting this horrific idea is both the right thing to do for the country and also good politics. It totally and completely unites the GOP, it drives a wedge between Democrats and moderate voters, and it divides the Democratic coalition. Republicans didn't start this fight, mind you. They're simply reacting to what the other side is not just talking about, but formally proposing. Here is Sen. Ben Sasse blasting this attack on our system, as well as Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell rhetorically strafing it from the floor:
I laughed out loud at this answer on court-packing from @BenSasse today (full interview here: https://t.co/g3Oq743yDZ) pic.twitter.com/XOl11KlhwS
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) April 15, 2021
“They’re introducing a bill to add 4 new seats to the Supreme Court so that Democrats can pack the Court, destroy its legitimacy, and guarantee the rulings liberals want. Across the ideological spectrum, top jurists have been outspoken on what a terrible idea court-packing would be. The late liberal icon, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, explicitly warned against court-packing, saying, quote, ‘if anything would make the Court appear partisan, it would be that.’ ‘Nine seems to be a good number.’ Justice Stephen Breyer reaffirmed his own opposition just last week. The public, by the way, agrees. They see through this discredited concept. One survey late last year showed that a clear majority of Americans oppose packing the Supreme Court. But the farthest-left activists aren’t interested in the common good. They want power. And the same Democrats and the same corporate media that spent the last four years hyperventilating and declaring a new constitutional crisis was underway every 30 seconds seem to be perfectly content to play along.
If Republicans had introduced a bill to add four Supreme Court seats for the last President to fill, there would have been weeks of wall-to-wall outrage on every newspaper and cable TV channel. Now it seems the main strategies are either to shrug and look the other way or to actively play along and lend credence. It’s not just about whether this insane bill becomes law. Part of the point here are the threats themselves. The left wants a sword dangling over the Justices when they weigh the facts in every case. As the Democratic Leader threatened just two years ago, Democrats want the Justices to know that they will ‘pay the price’ for rulings that Democrats don’t like. The left wants these swords dangling over the Senate, and state legislatures, and independent judges. The threats are the point. The hostage-taking is the point."
The threats are the point, and they haven't been bashful about it. McConnell's point about media coverage is obviously correct, but also important. It's always instructive to see what is treated as an assault on our republic, and what isn't. He's also right about two of the most consistently left-wing justices in recent memory both outright opposing court-packing:
MCCONNELL: The late Justice Ginsburg explicitly warned against court-packing, saying, “if anything would make the Court appear partisan, it would be that.” “Nine seems to be a good number.”
— Senate Republican Communications Center (@SRCC) April 15, 2021
Justice Stephen Breyer reaffirmed his own opposition just last week.
The public agrees. pic.twitter.com/h0bsQpS2No
And given the histrionics of the last few weeks about preserving our "values," or whatever, this is a good point too. Care to weigh in on insane court-packing, corporate America? Or do you only leap into action when the woke mob -- which would very much like to ruin your businesses and confiscate your wealth -- demands it?
If Republicans were smart they would get every corporation which took a stand on Georgia election rules to take a stand on expanding the Supreme Court. Corporations just care about our democracy, right? Prove it.
— Karol Markowicz (@karol) April 15, 2021
I'll leave you with AOC appearing to endorse the abolition of judicial review, established under Marbury v. Madison. But she evidently believes it's fine if 13 people are overturning laws instead of nine, or something. Sure, Jan:
I cannot find video of this, but it's pretty amazing that @AOC really said it.
— Jeryl Bier (@JerylBier) April 16, 2021
"...how just nine people 'can overturn laws that hundreds and thousands of legislators, advocates and policymakers drew consensus on.'"
Judicial review?https://t.co/SqVkgktAs0 pic.twitter.com/TZFy5KPAxp
Join the conversation as a VIP Member