Earlier today, Democrat members of Congress announced the introduction of legislation that would expand the number of members on the U.S. Supreme Court from 9 to 13 justices. Liberals claimed that Republicans were alarmist when they suggested this would happen with Democrat control of Congress and the White House, but here we are. Just last week, President Joe Biden announced the formation of the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States which many see as a vehicle for making the idea of packing the Supreme Court mainstream.Read more
Earlier today, the White House announced that it will be forming the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States. The move fulfills a promise that then-presidential candidate Joe Biden made last October during an interview with "60 Minutes" in the wake of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death. The press release announcing the Commission explains:
President Biden will today issue an executive order forming the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States, comprised of a bipartisan group of experts on the Court and the Court reform debate. In addition to legal and other scholars, the Commissioners includes former federal judges and practitioners who have appeared before the Court, as well as advocates for the reform of democratic institutions and of the administration of justice. The expertise represented on the Commission includes constitutional law, history and political science.Read more
Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer warned Americans to think "long and hard" about structural changes to the nation's highest court, such as adding justices through "court-packing," in a wide-ranging address Tuesday.Read more
On Thursday, Senate Judiciary Ranking Member Chuck Grassley wrote a letter to White House Counsel Dana Remus inquiring about reports that the Biden Administration would be creating a commission to recommend changes to the federal judiciary.
NEW → @ChuckGrassley is pressing the White House for information regarding reports of the formation of a ‘bipartisan commission’ to develop policies to “reform” the Supreme Court and federal judiciary.https://t.co/ZtpIjQfCuG— Sen. Grassley Press (@GrassleyPress) February 5, 2021
Much like Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, it's still unclear where Georgia Democratic U.S. Senate candidates Raphael Warnock and John Ossoff stand on court packing. Just so it's clear, court packing refers to FDR's unsuccessful attempt to add additional justices to the Supreme Court for political reasons (Dictionary.com conveniently changed the definition to fit the Democrats' narrative that Senate Republicans are somehow doing something wrong by confirming President Trump's nominees to the federal judiciary).Read more
2020 has led to many differences among the American people, but a majority of Americans agree on 2 things: Senators should confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court and say "no" to court packing. The percentage of Americans who support Judge Barrett's confirmation has increased by nearly 15% since President Trump announced her nomination to the Court.Read more
In the most striking moment of last night’s Vice Presidential Debate, Senator Kamala Harris refused to answer on court packing. But first, let us briefly address Senator Harris' citing of President Lincoln not filling a Supreme Court vacancy 27 days before an election.Read more
The Democrat Party is as radical as it has ever been and last night at the Presidential debate Joe Biden declared “I am the Democratic Party.” While President Trump and to a lesser extent Chris Wallace tried to pin down the former Vice President, he refused on such issues as court packing, or the issue of increasing the Supreme Court beyond nine members. How extreme an issue is this? Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders does not back it.
That was Joe Biden’s position as well in 2019. Yet now he refuses to answer the question.
Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning today issued the following statement responding to former Vice President Joe Biden's refusal to answer the question about court packing:
"[P]acking the Supreme Court would be a wholesale attack on the independence of the Judiciary. The message from Joe Biden is clear, he will pick as many Supreme Court Justices as it takes to get the judicial outcomes that he demands. For Biden, as someone who spent a lifetime in the Senate, including his stint at the Senate Judiciary Committee, to so cavalierly dismiss judicial independence is shocking and revealing about his true character. While some claim that they didn’t learn anything at the debates, the sad truth is, we learned that a Joe Biden presidency will not be constrained by the fundamental minority rights that were set forth by the Constitution and James Madison.”Read more
Moderate No More: Biden on Court Packing
Some say Democrat Party Nominee Vice President Biden is a moderate or center left. Whether he was once or not, he is now going as far left as he can. In the past Joe Biden was adamant against adding Justices to the Supreme Court, also known as Court Packing.
Biden stated in October, 2019:
"I would not get into court packing … We begin to lose any credibility the court has at all."
Many experts have concluded last night’s CNN Democratic Presidential debate was won by Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Moreover many “conservatives” liked Mayor Pete. However, on the issue that RNLA has been tracking- the candidate’s positions on judicial nominees and court packing- Mayor Pete was again a trainwreck last night. His position last night:
Now, I'm not talking about packing the court just with people who agree with me, although I certainly will appoint people who share my values, for example, the idea that women's reproductive freedom is an American right.
What I'm talking about is reforms that will depoliticize the court. We can't go on like this, where every single time there is a vacancy, we have this apocalyptic ideological firefight over what to do next.
Now, one way to fix this would be to have a 15-member court where five of the members can only be appointed by unanimous agreement of the other 10.Read more