If McConnell pushes through a nominee, President Biden should pack the court

[dajoki]

If McConnell pushes through a nominee, President Biden should pack the court
Republicans have put party over principle. Biden can do something about it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/09/19/mcconnell-biden-pack-court/

<<snip>>

Democrats have only one play here: If Trump and McConnell jam an appointee through, it is not enough for Democrats to raise hell about the hypocrisy, the duplicity and the Republican refusal to play by McConnell’s own rules. It is not enough to target every Republican senator who goes along. It is not enough to have voters bombard their Republican senators’ offices with phone calls and protests. Because those things have been happening for four years, and none of them have persuaded the GOP to put the stability of the country or the obligations of office ahead of that party’s thirst for power.

So Democrats should threaten to pack the court. And, if McConnell pushes through a new justice and then Joe Biden wins, they should follow through.

<<snip>>

With an election looming, Democrats can give voters a say. If they vow to expand the court, then Americans can cast their ballots with that in mind. Key to the message should be that McConnell and Senate Republicans have so repeatedly broken the rules, rigged the game and stolen victories that it’s become impossible to play on neutral turf. As Murkowski put it, fair is fair.

It’s a shame we’re here. But to restore a democracy that has been battered, bruised and robbed blind by the president and his party, Democrats will need to fight harder. If Republicans steal this seat, the only reasonable response is to change the number of judges on the bench.

[Statistical]

1. I don't like the term "pack the court" Biden should expand the court to restore balance.

[dajoki]

3. From the article:

Democrats need to realize that they’re up against a mendacious bully who is never going to follow even the rules he sets out. “Court-packing” is a loaded term, and if they’re smart, Democrats will find a more palatable one. But it’s a defensible and evenhanded move to assert that, if McConnell steals another Supreme Court seat (weeks before a national election), then Democrats will consider a presidential victory a mandate from voters to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court.

[Fullduplexxx]

6. Mpre voices are needed anyway

[JHB]

8. Exactly. Restoration of balance after gross partisan abuse of power regarding lifetime appointments

[dlk]

2. We need to be asking ourselves why an impeached president gets to nominate a Supreme Court Justice i

In the middle of an election, no less. Voting has already started. The mainstream media has sold us out in this respect with their toxic bothsiderism that continues to erode our democracy.

[no_hypocrisy]

4. But, as a corollary, couldn't McConnell *reduce* the number of Justices on The Court?

Say that Stephen Breyer retires or dies, couldn't Mitch just take a vote not to seat a *liberal* Justice? That would make a 6-2 conservative majority, making even dissents to be perfunctory.

I see the real problem is that a new conservative majority will not follow precedence (the decisions of past cases), which is largely non-conservative. They would be what conservatives have yowled about forever: activist justices.

[Statistical]

5. The Constitution provides no timeframe for confirming a justice so it isn't clear.

In a moral and just world the Supreme Court would rule that the majority leader refusing to ever confirm any nominee is Unconstitutional but I don't have faith that would happen.

So that is why we need to take the Senate. Of course we can't expand the Supreme Court without taking the Senate either.

[Statistical]

9. Republicans take power when available, Democrats worry about what Republican might do in the future

Could Republicans expand the court in the future if they win back both houses and the Presidency? Sure. Is that any worse than doing nothing and having GUARANTEED a 6-3 majority on the court from this year to that hypothetical someday point.

Opening PR & DC to statehood likewise is essentially zero risk. States can be added by consent of Congress. They can't be removed by Congress.


As for splitting up Montana. Well once it is unlikely Montana would consent to be split up and two seperating out the Urban areas of Montana likely would give Democrats additional senators.

Do what you can when you can. That is what Republicans do while Democrats sit around worrying about hypotheticals which might never happen.

[JHB]

10. Hard to say for certain, but rewarding abuse of lifetime appointment powers by doing nothing...

...is also a "where does it end?" question. Where does acquiescence to naked power plays end?

Replacing RBG after the months-long standing on "principle" to block an Obama appointment is as blatant a move as can be and provides clear justification for responding with extraordinary measures.

They won't have that in 2024, and if they do it anyway, then it's a fight that needs to be fought.

[dajoki]

11. It stops when they realize...

their naked partisan bullshit won't be tolerated. Like it says in the article, we aren't on a level playing field, it's time we level it. Demographics and the trend of the country are not on their side, we will eventually win and they can see it coming, that is why they are trying to grab as much power as they can right now. We must prevail.