Politics Americans agree: Court packing is dangerous
Democrats to Introduce Bill to Expand the Supreme Court
The bill would expand the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13.Senator Ed Markey (D., Mass.) will sponsor the bill in the Senate, while Representatives Jerry Nadler (D., N.Y.), Mondaire Jones (D., N.Y.) and Hank Johnson (D., Ga.) will serve as its advocates in the House, according to The Intercept.
"It was a bonehead idea. It was a terrible, terrible mistake to make. And it put in question, for an entire decade, the independence of the most significant body... in this country, the Supreme Court of the United States of America."
in 1983. He was denouncing Franklin D. Roosevelt's "court packing" plan, which would have empowered the president to appoint up to six new justices to the nation's highest court. But fast forward to 2021, and President Biden is singing a different tune.
This month, heto study the possibility of packing the court. Not to be outdone, his allies in Congress promptly that would add four justices to the bench. While the , there's no question: Court packing has more momentum than at any point since the 1930s.
Breaking down the Left's Supreme Court agenda
A Democratic proposal to add four justices to the U.S. Supreme Court is one of several changes sought by liberal activists determined to rein in the high court's conservative majority.Democratic members of the House and Senate introduced legislation on Thursday that would raise the number of justices on the court from nine to 13 — a move that sparked immediate pushback from Republicans.
Yet the Joe Biden of yesteryear was right. Historically, court packing was a terrible idea, as a matter of politics and principle. Court packing is the majority party adding justices to the court in order to get the political results they desire. As history shows us, once a country does this, the independence of the judiciary is over. You no longer have "Constitutional rights." You have whatever "rights" the majority party lets you have.
The parallels between FDR's court packing plan and the current Democratic court packing push are many. Then, as now, a liberal president felt hemmed in by a constitutionalist Supreme Court majority. Then, as now, court packing seemed to be a viable solution to sweep away the opposition. Most importantly,then, as now, broadly recognized that court packing endangered the country's constitutional order.
Biden's 6-Month Reprieve From the Left’s Court-Packing Push
There was no announcement in the White House East Room recognizing respected veteran Washington figures selected as the bipartisan co-chairs. It wasn't even mentioned on the daily White House schedule. In short, the unveiling of President Biden's 36-member commission on Supreme Court reforms was even more understated than most blue-ribbon panels set up to study -- but never really resolve -- thorny third-rail policy issues like Medicare reform during President George W. Bush’s tenure or more aspirational goals such as fiscal responsibility at the beginning of the Obama administration. There’s a good reason for that.
The history of FDR's effort is instructive. Like President Biden in 2020, FDR refused to endorse the idea of court packing in his 1936 presidential campaign,during the campaign. Once elected, however, he swiftly introduced a court packing proposal. The response from the American public was equally swift.
As Congress began debating FDR's plan, Americans deluged their senators and representatives. It was common for members of Congress to receive- a rarity at the time. As , Americans saw the Supreme Court as "sacrosanct," and their elected leaders in Congress ultimately reflected that view. The debate in Congress took months, only to fail in the end, thanks to bipartisan opposition - and several Supreme Court decisions that upheld Roosevelt's New Deal programs.
Court packing took 168 days to fail in 1937. In 2021, President Biden has, though the debate will surely go beyond that deadline. As this process plays out, the biggest question is where the American people stand on the issue. Fortunately, new polling from the First Liberty Institute proves that Americans are still overwhelmingly opposed to this dangerous policy.
Supreme Court passes on Second Amendment cases challenging lifetime gun ownership ban
The Supreme Court declined to hear three Second Amendment cases challenging a federal ban on gun ownership for people convicted of nonviolent crimes.By not taking the appeals, the nation's highest court let stand a series of lower court rulings that prohibited people convicted of driving under the influence, making false statements on tax returns and selling counterfeit cassette tapes from owning a gun.
Late last week, the organization I lead partnered with Mason-Dixon Polling and Strategy -- to survey 1,100 registered voters across the political spectrum. that 68 percent of Americans oppose court packing in any form. This includes virtually all Republicans, the overwhelming majority of independents, and even a third of Democrats. More than half oppose President Biden's commission, while only 43 percent support it.
There's no need to wonder why Americans feel this way. A plurality of voters worry that court packing would undermine the Supreme Court's independence - a crucial feature of our constitutional structure of separation of powers. By a more than 2-to-1 margin, voters also worry that court packing would weaken protection of fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Constitution. Nearly two-thirds see court packing as a partisan attempt to increase political power, while nearly 60 percent believe that Biden is using court packing to threaten the Supreme Court into submission.
Court packing legislation straight out of Maduro's playbook
Centralizing power is something dictators do, and we will fight tooth and nail against any power grab that attempts to change our government in such a militant manner. Carlos Gimenez represents Florida's 26th District and Nicole Malliotakis represents New York's 11th District.
The people are right. A packed Supreme Court most likely would permanently politicize the Supreme Court, removing the separation of powers. The court would simply be an adjunct under the president's and Congress' political party in charge. Its legitimacy would wither, eroding public confidence in its rulings. And the rulings themselves would surely deserve it. Whatever rights you cherish most - religious liberty, the right to keep and bear arms, free speech, private property rights, freedom of the press - could be in jeopardy.have done this to disastrous results.
Biden was right the first time: Court packing is a boneheaded idea. If the president and Democrats in Congress move forward, the country will not be on their side. Americans know that the last thing we need is a Supreme Court coup. We need our constitutional system. It's the envy of the world.
Kelly Shackelford is president, CEO and chief counsel of, which exclusively defends Americans' religious liberty. A constitutional scholar, he has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court and testified before the U.S. House and Senate. Follow him on Twitter .
Opinion: What Biden did with his Trump inheritance .
As President Joe Biden approaches his 100th day in office, CNN Opinion asked contributors to share their assessment of the Democratic leader's performance thus far.David Axelrod: A welcome tonic after years of chaos