•   
  •   
  •   

Politics Pack the court? Battles between Republicans and Democrats fuel clash over Supreme Court's future

18:25  25 october  2020
18:25  25 october  2020 Source:   usatoday.com

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett moves closer to Senate confirmation as hearing ends

  Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett moves closer to Senate confirmation as hearing ends Republicans brushed aside Democrats' complaints about the partisan process leading to Barrett's expected confirmation during a pandemic and election.Republicans brushed aside Democrats' complaints about the process leading to Barrett's expected confirmation in the midst of a pandemic and a presidential race that the committee chairman acknowledged the GOP may lose.

WASHINGTON – Democrats facing the prospect of a Supreme Court tilted 6-3 in favor of conservative justices have a number of rejoinders to consider if they win the White House and full control of Congress next month.

Fuming at what President Donald Trump and Republicans have done since 2016 to turn the court to the right, they could fight back with legislation, Senate rules changes – even by granting statehood (and two Senate seats) to the District of Columbia or Puerto Rico.

a person standing in front of a building: WASHINGTON, DC - OCTOBER 22: On a foggy morning, protesters with the “Handmaids Brigade” march outside the U.S. Supreme Court prior to a hearing held by the Senate Judiciary Committee to vote on the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett on October 22, 2020 in Washington, DC. The committee is expected to formally confirm the nomination later today, with the full U.S. Senate scheduled to vote on the nomination next Monday. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images) *** BESTPIX *** ORG XMIT: 775580351 ORIG FILE ID: 1281642020 © Win McNamee, Getty Images WASHINGTON, DC - OCTOBER 22: On a foggy morning, protesters with the “Handmaids Brigade” march outside the U.S. Supreme Court prior to a hearing held by the Senate Judiciary Committee to vote on the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett on October 22, 2020 in Washington, DC. The committee is expected to formally confirm the nomination later today, with the full U.S. Senate scheduled to vote on the nomination next Monday. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images) *** BESTPIX *** ORG XMIT: 775580351 ORIG FILE ID: 1281642020

The most tantalizing prospect: packing the court.

Merriam-Webster dictionary updates 'sexual preference' entry after Amy Coney Barrett hearing

  Merriam-Webster dictionary updates 'sexual preference' entry after Amy Coney Barrett hearing Merriam-Webster added the word "offensive" to its usage guidance of "preference" and "sexual preference" when referring to sexual orientation.During the hearing Tuesday, Barrett was asked whether she agrees with the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s criticism of the same-sex marriage ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges – the landmark case which legalized gay marriage in the United States and which advocates worry Barrett would not support if confirmed to the nation's highest court.

Start the day smarter. Get all the news you need in your inbox each morning.

Not since 1869 has the number of Supreme Court justices been changed. Not since 1937 has anyone seriously tried.

But as the Senate Judiciary Committee considered Trump's nomination of federal appeals court Judge Amy Coney Barrett last week, Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island issued a warning:

“Don’t think that when you have established the rule of 'because we can,' that should the shoe be on the other foot, you will have any credibility to come to us and say, 'Yeah I know you can do that, but you shouldn’t," Whitehouse said.

He didn't specify what he had in mind. He didn't need to. A year earlier, Whitehouse warned the justices in court papers that if the high court did not "heal itself," the American public might demand that it be "restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics."

Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court hearings lacked the drama that Brett Kavanaugh's proceedings had. Here's why.

  Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court hearings lacked the drama that Brett Kavanaugh's proceedings had. Here's why. Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court confirmation hearings lacked the drama of Brett Kavanaugh's proceedings. Here's why.Democrats warned of the precedent set if Republicans rushed through a nominee in the middle of a pandemic and presidential election, arguing no nominee should be considered until after voters cast ballots. They rattled off threats to slow the process, teasing a host of tools that could bog down the hearings, with some lawmakers even publicly suggesting launching impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump.

That was code, all 53 Senate Republicans complained in a letter to the justices, for packing the court. Since then, the voices on both sides have only gotten louder.

Given Barrett's imminent confirmation and polls predicting Democratic gains on Election Day, Whitehouse's threat could be front and center next year.

Here's what all the fuss is about:

High court history

No American alive today can recall a Supreme Court without nine justices, other than because of a temporary vacancy.

But the Constitution does not set the number, and it has changed a half dozen times before. Created in 1789 with six justices, the court has veered from five to 10 at the whim of presidents and Congresses. The Judiciary Act of 1869 set the number at nine, and it hasn't been changed since.

Not that it hasn't been tried. The closest call came in 1937, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt proposed giving himself the power to name up to six more justices who would back New Deal legislation. That effort died in the Senate along with its chief sponsor, who suffered a heart attack.

Senate Democrats will boycott Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court confirmation hearing vote as GOP vows to move forward

  Senate Democrats will boycott Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court confirmation hearing vote as GOP vows to move forward Senate Democrats say they will boycott a committee hearing Thursday where Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court nomination is set to move forward.The Senate Judiciary Committee is set to vote tomorrow afternoon on Barrett's confirmation to the high court, a vote that was expected to pass along party lines and send her nomination to the full Senate for a Monday vote — just eight days before Election Day.

But was it a complete failure? Before FDR's effort, the conservative court obstructed his initiatives. But after he unveiled his proposal, the court upheld a law restructuring labor relations, and he went on to enjoy other successes.

'They started this'

Fast forward to 1987. Battles over the federal courts escalated after President Ronald Reagan's Supreme Court nominee, Robert Bork, was defeated, 58-42, in the Democratic-controlled Senate. Four years later, now-Associate Justice Clarence Thomas nearly was blocked following allegations of sexual harassment.

The judicial wars extended to lower courts as well. Democrats blocked President George W. Bush's nomination of Miguel Estrada to the powerful U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 2001. Two current members of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Elena Kagan, were blocked from that appeals court as well, though Roberts eventually was confirmed for a seat on that bench.

The partisan warfare escalated to a new level in 2013, when Republicans blocked President Barack Obama from filling three vacant seats on the D.C. Circuit. To break the impasse, Democrats changed Senate rules to strip the minority party of their power to filibuster lower court nominees.

Republicans on Senate panel to vote on Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court nomination as Democrats boycott hearing

  Republicans on Senate panel to vote on Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court nomination as Democrats boycott hearing The Senate Judiciary Committee will vote on Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation to the Supreme Court on Thursday, setting up a full Senate vote Monday.The Senate Judiciary Committee is set to meet at 9 a.m. EDT. Barrett is expected to be approved by Republicans who hold the majority on the panel, with Democrats saying they will boycott the day's proceedings. The full Senate is expected to take a final vote on Barrett's confirmation on Monday, eight days before Election Day.

"They started this, not me," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Thursday as the panel voted to send Barrett's nomination to the Senate.

Republicans retaliated in 2016 by blocking President Barack Obama's nomination of federal appeals court Judge Merrick Garland to succeed Associate Justice Antonin Scalia. Garland would have flipped the high court to having a majority of justices named by Democratic presidents, so Republicans held the seat open for 14 months.

More: Conservatives, liberals mull next Supreme Court battle with memories of 2016

After Trump was elected and nominated federal appeals court Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Scalia seat, Democrats used the filibuster to block him, so Republicans changed Senate rules to eliminate that minority power. Gorsuch was confirmed in 2017, Brett Kavanaugh followed in 2018, and this year, Republicans reversed their 2016 precedent and pushed Barrett through the confirmation process in the midst of an election.

Throughout the decades-long battle, the message has been clear: Both Republicans and Democrats will use whatever power they have to confirm their preferred judges and justices and block the other side. Now, faced with a 6-3 conservative court, Democrats are contemplating the next step.

Fact check: Post online misquotes Biden on court-packing amid debate over size of Supreme Court

  Fact check: Post online misquotes Biden on court-packing amid debate over size of Supreme Court Joe Biden never said the “day after” he’s elected, people will “know what he stands for.” A Google search of the exact quote turned up no results. He did make a similar comment on Oct. 8 regarding the topic of court-packing, which is the idea of expanding the size of the Supreme Court. It was most famously suggested by President Franklin D. Roosevelt during the 1930s, according to the New York Times.

Democrats in disarray?

Calls for Democrats to "pack the court" if they win the White House and Senate and retain control of the House emanate from the far left of the party's ranks.

Led by groups such as Demand Justice and Take Back the Court, the rationale is that Republicans starting in 2016 blocked Democrats from establishing a 5-4 majority in an election year, then reversed themselves and elevated their own nominee to win a 6-3 majority that could last for decades.

But with former vice president Joe Biden initially "not a fan" of the idea, and only now proposing to establish a commission to look at options, most mainstream Democrats have held back. The party platform only calls for adding more judges to federal trial and appeals courts, which is one way to counter Trump's success in winning Senate confirmation of more than 200 judges in the past 3½ years.

More: President Trump has transformed the federal courts, but John Roberts still leads them

a group of people walking in front of a crowd: The flag-draped casket of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg arrives at the Supreme Court in Washington, Wednesday, Sept. 23, 2020. Ginsburg, 87, died of cancer on Sept. 18. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) ORG XMIT: DCSA213 © J. Scott Applewhite, AP The flag-draped casket of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg arrives at the Supreme Court in Washington, Wednesday, Sept. 23, 2020. Ginsburg, 87, died of cancer on Sept. 18. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) ORG XMIT: DCSA213

“We are glad to see growing recognition of the desperate need for reform," Aaron Belkin, director of Take Back the Court, said Thursday. "But we don’t need a commission to tell us that a stolen, partisan Supreme Court is bad for America. We just need to take it back.”

Yet even Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in July 2019, said, "Nine seems to be a good number."

President Trump has kept his promise to remake the federal bench, including the Supreme Court

  President Trump has kept his promise to remake the federal bench, including the Supreme Court Trump has become the first president since Richard Nixon to name three judges to the Supreme Court in a first term.With the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to fill the vacancy created by the death  of liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Trump has become the first president since Richard Nixon to name three judges to the nation's highest court during a first term.

"If anything would make the court look partisan, it would be that – one side saying, 'When we're in power, we're going to enlarge the number of judges, so we would have more people who would vote the way we want them to,'" she told NPR.

a close up of a sign: Protesters opposed to the confirmation of President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, rally at the Supreme Court on Capitol Hill, in Washington, Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2020. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana) ORG XMIT: DCJL115 © Jose Luis Magana, AP Protesters opposed to the confirmation of President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, rally at the Supreme Court on Capitol Hill, in Washington, Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2020. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana) ORG XMIT: DCJL115

The issue divided Democrats during the presidential primaries. Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Ind., proposed having 15 justices named through three separate processes. Others, including Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., now the vice presidential nominee, said they were open to court-packing as an option.

"We are on the verge of a crisis of confidence in the Supreme Court," Harris told Politico in March. "We have to take this challenge head on, and everything is on the table to do that."

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., echoed that sentiment as recently as Thursday after Barrett cleared the Judiciary Committee, saying: "Everything is on the table when we get the majority."

GOP goes on offense

Because the idea is controversial, the phrase "pack the court" is uttered more by Republicans as the Barrett confirmation process and presidential election come to a close.

"Court-packing by either party would guarantee retribution when the Senate and the White House next changed hands," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said. "The escalation would not end. Our independent judiciary would spiral into one more partisan battleground."

a man standing in a room: Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett meets with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on Capitol Hill in Washington on Sept. 29. McConnell pushed the confirmation during an election year, something he refused to do in 2016. © SUSAN WALSH, POOL/AFP via Getty Images Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett meets with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on Capitol Hill in Washington on Sept. 29. McConnell pushed the confirmation during an election year, something he refused to do in 2016.

Rather than wait for Democrats to try packing the court, Republicans in the House and Senate have proposed constitutional amendments that would set the number of justices at nine. A group of former state attorneys general is lobbying for the same thing under the banner, "Keep Nine."

Fact check: There is no Sen. Rob Donaldson, so posts of his speech about Barrett are fake

  Fact check: There is no Sen. Rob Donaldson, so posts of his speech about Barrett are fake A post on new Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett originated as a hypothetical. It took off, with many people assuming it was from a real senator.Several Facebook posts shared in the wake of those hearings include a long comment appearing to be a transcript of a speech made by a Sen. Rob Donaldson before the committee.

Said Graham at Thursday's Judiciary Committee meeting: “I don’t know where this ends or how it ends.”

Potential alternatives

If Biden wins the presidency and establishes a commission, it likely will examine additional proposals. Among the most prominent is establishing term limits for Supreme Court justices.

A growing list of legal scholars supports ending life tenure for justices, but implementing it would be difficult. It almost certainly would require a constitutional amendment or some proponents believe there is a way for Congress to pass legislation requiring that justices retire, take "senior" status with lesser duties, or move to an appeals court.

Legislation introduced in the House calls for future justices to serve a maximum of 18 years, so that eventually each president would get two nominations per four-year term. It has the support of Fix the Court, which advocates for increased transparency and accountability.

"The Supreme Court is too powerful and too political, and we need to do something about it," Fix the Court executive director Gabe Roth said following Biden's pledge to form a commission. “With justices serving twice as long on average as they did a few generations ago, and with nearly every major case being decided by the slimmest of margins, it’s in the country’s long-term interest to build a court that’s less reliant on the health of octogenarians and more capable of compromise."

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Pack the court? Battles between Republicans and Democrats fuel clash over Supreme Court's future

Fact check: There is no Sen. Rob Donaldson, so posts of his speech about Barrett are fake .
A post on new Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett originated as a hypothetical. It took off, with many people assuming it was from a real senator.Several Facebook posts shared in the wake of those hearings include a long comment appearing to be a transcript of a speech made by a Sen. Rob Donaldson before the committee.

usr: 1
This is interesting!