General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsReports: FMR. AG Holder says Next Democratic President Should Add Seats to the Supreme Court.
Former U.S. attorney general Eric Holder advocated for Supreme Court packing at a Yale Law National Security Group conversation Thursday afternoon, according to three students who attended the event. A Holder spokesperson Patrick Rodenbush later confirmed his statement to The Daily Beast.https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2019/03/08/former-ag-holder-advocates-for-court-packing-at-yls-event/ *more at link*
The comment came when an audience member asked Holder to clarify his when they go low, we kick them comment made in October a reference to Michelle Obamas now famous line, When they go low, we go high. Holder answered that while civility is an important principle, Democrats are adverse to wielding power like Republicans have, according to Ramis Wadood LAW 21, who attended the event. Holder went on to say that if he were president and had a Democratic majority in Congress, he would seriously consider adding two seats to the Supreme Court to make up for Mitch McConnells power-grabbing antics and his blocking of Merrick Garlands confirmation, Wadood recalled.
Holders office did not respond to comment Thursday afternoon. Several audience members, including Wadood, are researchers for an initiative urging Democrats to expand federal courts called Pack the Courts.
greymattermom
(5,751 posts)because the country is so much bigger than it was when the constitution was written. It may have actually been their intent because they did not specify the number of members of the court.
Dennis Donovan
(18,770 posts)...to the extreme measures McConnell has taken to cheat Dems out of judgeships.
dalton99a
(81,073 posts)dalton99a
(81,073 posts)Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures.
NewJeffCT
(56,827 posts)add seats to the lower federal courts as well to combat the unprecedented tactics Republicans used to block nominees under Obama.
pecosbob
(7,511 posts)I lauded this idea in recent threads and my comment was met with a chorus of 'bad idea', and 'will be abused by Repubs'. Now that former AG Holder floats the idea, nothing but crickets...
Stellar
(5,644 posts)and I thought that it would even fuel the GOTV, and I wondered what nay sayers thought too.
theboss
(10,491 posts)This ends with 121 Supreme Court Justices.
Javaman
(62,442 posts)cabinet full of conspiracy theories.
Amishman
(5,541 posts)It erases what remains of the independence of the court. It will become standard practice for each party to seize control of the judiciary when they take sufficient power. It guarantees the courts are always a rubber stamp of the ruling party. It sounds tempting with our control a near sure thing after 2020, but the long term ramifications are terrifying.
No, I won't support it at all.