Anti-Court Packing

As of right now, it looks like Amy Coney Barrett will get confirmed to the Supreme Court before the election, even if she’ll be seated under the wire.  A plurality of Americans want Barrett seated, according to a Rasmussen poll.  Conservatives shouldn’t take anything for granted; to quote Marcus Cato Censorius, “many things can come between the mouth and a morsel of food.”  But it does seem that ACB will soon be Justice Barrett, and America will be better off for it.

Of course, the Democrats are in high dudgeon, and are already threatening to pack the Court should they win the presidency and gain a senatorial majority this November.  Conservatives have anticipated this potential move for some time, but haven’t done much to stymie it.  Our focus has been, understandably, affixed on merely gaining a solid constitutionalist majority on the Court, but today’s Left will do anything to demolish a conservative Court.

Just as Democrats threatened to impeach Trump [thanks to jonolan for sharing that post with his readers, too —TPP] for making a constitutional appointment, they’re not seeking to dilute the Supreme Court, cheapening its gravity and significance, by adding additional justices.  Their solution is to expand the Court enough enough to make the potentially 6-3 conservative majority irrelevant.

After all, with the Democrats, if the rules favor your opponents, change them.  If the people don’t want your ideology, force it on them via judicial or executive fiat.

The Constitution is silent on the number of justices that are to sit on the Supreme Court.  It leaves that number to Congress to decide.  Congress initially set the number of justices at six—five associate justices and one Chief Justice—in the Judiciary Act of 1789, but the number has shifted over time to accommodate caseloads, or even to serve temporary political interests.  After the tumultuous Andrew Johnson presidency the reign of the Radical Republicans during Reconstruction, the number of justices settled at its present nine in 1869.

The next major attempt to alter the number of justices came in 1937, when Franklin Roosevelt sought to add one justice to the Court for every justice over seventy.  His “court-packing” plan would have expanded the Court to fifteen justices.  To both Democrats and Republicans at the time, FDR’s scheme was clearly a power-grab:  SCOTUS struck down many initiatives of the First New Deal as unconstitutional, and it was obvious the president was seeking to pack the Court with New Dealers who would uphold his programs.  Even Vice President John Nance Garner disagreed with the idea.

It’s clear that the Democrats today have the same notion in mind:  if you can’t win legitimately, just change the rules or the numbers to favor the outcome you desire.  The long-term issue is that should the Democrats be successful in packing the Court in 2021 or beyond, nothing is to stop Republicans from doing the same when they regain Congress and the presidency (although the Democrats are probably banking that won’t ever happen again—and are likely altering the rules accordingly).

It’s not hard to imagine, then, a Supreme Court consisting of fifteen, then twenty-one, then thirty—why not 100?!—justices.  At which point the Supreme Court will become a farce.  It’s little wonder, then, that 62% of Americans support a constitutional amendment to affix the number of justice at nine.

In a better age, we’d leave the number up to a sober-minded Congress to decide.  Perhaps there may be some future need for a slight expansion of the Court, such as heavier caseloads or backlogged dockets.  But now we can no longer trust Congress to fulfill its constitutional duties with probity and restraint.

Such are the wages of judicial supremacy.  The Democrats enjoyed a long run of judicial dominance, and pushed judicial activism as a means of circumventing Republican presidents and Congresses.  They successfully forced, among other things, abortion and gay marriage on the nation.  Now that their grasp on that supreme institution is wavering, they once again seek to alter the Court to preserve their dominance.

The will to power among Democrats will destroy the Republic.  If the Democrats succeed in packing the Court, we will be another step along the road—a road I fear we are already far, far down—to perdition.

That makes it all the more pressing that conservatives deny Democrats the opportunity.  Even the most mealy-mouthed, lukewarm Republican in Congress is better than a power-hungry, radical, anti-American, anti-republicanism Democrat.

Vote anti-court packing.  Vote Republican.  Vote for TRUMP!


Donate to The Portly Politico

Support quality commentary on politics, education, culture, and the arts with your one-time donation.

5.00 $

3 thoughts on “Anti-Court Packing

  1. Outstanding article. You’ve got the plan plainly – and more importantly – correctly nailed.

    One would like to think – as in days gone by – that once the election is over, life will settle down. We can give up hope of seeing that. It will be four more years of this nonsense should (please God!) President Trump win.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I’m praying hard that President Trump enjoys a speedy recovery and a decisive victory. It’s worth another four years of Leftist tears and obfuscation to keep him in office. I shudder to contemplate what comes next, though.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s