These candidates for President say expanding the Supreme Court is ON THE TABLE!

Democrats aren’t shying away from the radical idea to expand the number of justices on the Supreme Court in order to ‘take it back’ from these constitutional justices that Trump has put on the court.

In fact several Democratic candidates for president have said that they are open to the idea of such an expansion if they win the presidency:

POLITICO – After watching Mitch McConnell transform the judiciary over the past four years, liberals are demanding a bold response. And Democrats are listening.

Sens. Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren and Kirsten Gillibrand told POLITICO they would not rule out expanding the Supreme Court if elected president, showcasing a new level of interest in the Democratic field on an issue that has until recently remained on the fringes of debate.

The surprising openness from White House hopefuls along with other prominent Senate Democrats to making sweeping changes — from adding seats to the high court to imposing term limits on judges and more — comes as the party is eager to chip away at the GOP’s growing advantage in the courts.

“We are on the verge of a crisis of confidence in the Supreme Court,” said Harris (D-Calif.). “We have to take this challenge head on, and everything is on the table to do that.”

Expanding the Supreme Court would amount to a historic power play by the next Democratic president and Congress, requiring an intense legislative fight and the abandonment of many judicial and congressional norms.

Of course we know from past comments that both presidential candidates Beto O’Rourke and Pete Buttigieg are also in favor of this radical move.



Again with Merrick Garland…

But Democrats say that after Republicans blocked Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland and other lower court judges during President Barack Obama’s final term only to quickly fill those vacancies, the party needs an equally bruising response.

They keep throwing this in our faces as if it was some illegal travesty or something. But Joe Biden, when he was head of the judiciary committee back in 1992 actually said…

On June 25, 1992, he said that if a Supreme Court vacancy happened that year, the president should not nominate anyone and, if he did, the Judiciary Committee should not hold a hearing “until after the political campaign season is over.”

And Schumer said in 2007 that all Bush nominations should be blocked for the rest of his term.

Democrats only love election year SCOTUS nominations when they are from Democrats. Anyway, just setting the record straight on that again.

Not all presidential candidates are hot on this idea yet:

Others aren’t willing to go there just yet. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), a liberal running for president, seemed cool to the idea.

“I’m open to these kind of conversations, but I really caution people about doing things that become a tit for tat throughout history,” Booker said in an interview. “So when the Democrats expand it to 11, 12 judges, when Republicans have it, they expand it to 15 judges.”

And 2020 candidate Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) was equally cautious: “You always want to look at all ideas, but I think right now the most reasonable thing is to win the elections and to try to stop the bad judges.”

I think Booker and Klobuchar both know that this is a radical move and don’t want it to put their candidacies in jeopardy. But I have no doubt that they’d be willing to go this route once the election is over.

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.
newest oldest most voted
Sentinel
Member
Noble Member
Sentinel

Crybaby democrats can’t win without lying, cheating or stealing. This is evil desperation.

Chow Yun Fatty
Member
Active Member
Chow Yun Fatty

Distraction. Meanwhile they import voters from south of the border, grant them drivers licenses and wait until they hold both houses and the Presidency. So long as they have enough squish republicans, they pass amnesty, grant citizenship, and win every election onward. As reprehensible they are as people, they know how to play the long game.

Texas Chris
Member
Trusted Member
Texas Chris

There’s not one single constitutional justice on the supreme court. Not one.

Lillie Belle
Member
Active Member
Lillie Belle

Who has been?

Texas Chris
Member
Trusted Member
Texas Chris

That’s kind of my point. None since the Marshall court.

PlotEvil
Member
Active Member
PlotEvil

Let’s say the dems win the WH and Senate. They pass getting more judges on SCOTUS. then a conservative comes in a few years later and re-stacks the court with people who actually follow the Constitution. Then what will they do? Expand again? The left wants to constantly change the rules when it doesn’t work in their favor. Can someone please explain this to them that their stupidity can and will eventually backfire on them?

Texas Chris
Member
Trusted Member
Texas Chris

The fact that they’re changing the rules indicates they feel they’re losing.

Which they are.

Duanethetub
Member
Member
Duanethetub

If they try to pack the court legal challenges will put the issue before the SCOTUS.
And since the issue is not addressed in the US Constitution, their decision will be final.
So the question will be just how many of the nine will rule to dilute their personal power and influence?
Maybe RBG because she’s dying and may do it for the Leftist cause.

jamespubliusmadison
Member
Active Member
jamespubliusmadison

In a scenario where Trump is re-elected, and Democrats take control of the Senate and keep the House in 2020, what’s their plan?

Blackbeard
Member
Member
Blackbeard

An even more ominous riddle be wha’ if Trump be re-elected, Republicans keep control o’ th’ Senate ‘n loot back th’ House in 2020, wha’ be thar plan?

DaYooper
Member
Active Member
DaYooper

It appears the Ghost of FDR hovers above the Democrat caucus. Been there…. Done that…. Next play?

D Guest
Member
Active Member
D Guest

Booker finally said something reasonable.

If the Dems were to do this it’s tantamount to a declaration of war. They’ve already nearly done that, by refusing to accept the results of a presidential election.

Ronbo
Member
Active Member
Ronbo

There is no end to this without a leader that can unify the nation like Reagan. The divisions will only grow deeper and we will be headed for more civil chaos in the future if we continue on this path of hatred for each other that we have.
We have moved beyond political debate into a realm of outright hostility. This is just the first salvo in what will become open hostilities in the next 50 years.

D Guest
Member
Active Member
D Guest

Quite so.

Watchman
Member
Noble Member
Watchman

At this point I don’t believe any one person is going to turn things around. There is an ideological divide that has become to wide to mend. The progressive have, for the most part, taken control of all of our institutions and spheres of influence. The culture itself has changed drastically, and this is the biggest problem. At best I feel like we’re trying to hold the damn from bursting by sticking our finger in the hole. I come from a difference perspective, but to me nothing short of a spiritual awakening is going to turn things around.

DemocratsRFubar
Member
Noble Member
DemocratsRFubar

The donkeycrats are all for allowing felons, illegal aliens and sixteen year olds to vote. they approve of infanticide. They want to do away with the electoral college. Expanding the Supreme court to stack their deck? It’s in their wheelhouse and no surprise there.

nc checks and balances
Member
Noble Member
nc checks and balances

The Lefties keep proposing these outrageous new changes, but we can’t even bring up the idea of getting rid of “birthright citizenship” to children of illegals. exclamation

PVG
Member
Trusted Member
PVG

Ignore it, these are all sore losers!

DemocratsRFubar
Member
Noble Member
DemocratsRFubar

AvatarPVG

Cannot ignore them, they are very dangerous.

Apolitical
Member
Member
Apolitical

None of this matters anyway. This country has been taken over. The constitution is no longer in effect. Go ahead and expand the court to 11, 15 or greater….the same scripted results will always prevail.

Kenoshamarge
Member
Noble Member
Kenoshamarge

I needed to find what had to be done to expand the court and this is what I found:

The procedure would be for Congress to revoke the jurisdictional statute that allows for 9 Supreme Court Justices, and enact a new statute requiring more. There would always have to be an uneven number because there would be too many tied votes, solving nothing. BUT, in order for a Congressional Act to become a law it must be signed by the president.

Personally I see no need to change a number that has been around since 1869 and no benefit. The only reason to change the number, IMO, is to get more justices on “your” side. And that’s just disgusting because the Supreme Court shouldn’t’ be on anyone’s side – just about the law.

bigfoot
Member
Active Member
bigfoot

If at first you don’t succeed, change the rules.

DemocratsRFubar
Member
Noble Member
DemocratsRFubar

bigfootbigfoot

They never played by the rules anyway. Tell them to take their marbles and go home.

DinoDoc
Member
Active Member
DinoDoc

You’d think people would learn from the failure of FDR’s attempt before supporting such idiocy again.

Kenoshamarge
Member
Noble Member
Kenoshamarge

People can’t learn from what they don’t know. And most are so abysmally ignorant of their own country’s history they know little.

sjmom
Member
Noble Member
sjmom

If you can’t win …………………. then cheat. This is what the current Democrat Party is about and it’s disgusting.

Squirrelly
Member
Noble Member
Squirrelly

They don’t even try to hide it. This story makes me so angry.

sjmom
Member
Noble Member
sjmom

Yep.

JamestheCrusader
Member
Member
JamestheCrusader

Trump should increase the size to 11 and add Amy Comey Barrett plus another originalist (if he can do constitutionally without Congress), see if those Demorats will stand by there consideration.

sjmom
Member
Noble Member
sjmom

Don’t think he can.

Texas Chris
Member
Trusted Member
Texas Chris

I don’t believe there’s a law that caps the number of justices…
Good rundown here:
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/why-does-the-supreme-court-have-nine-justices
Congress tries to tie the SC seats to the number of circuit courts, which is currently 9, but has been as high as 10 and low as 5.

sjmom
Member
Noble Member
sjmom

Texas ChrisTexas Chris Thank you for the article. Explains it well.

GhostRider2001
Member
Trusted Member
GhostRider2001

To enact a socialist/communist agenda is going to require that the courts be stacked with liberals to nullify the rule of law, the Constitution, and Justice Thomas and anyone Trump puts on the court . FDR tried and failed to stack the courts, but our citizenry is much more ignorant today than seventy years ago.

New West
Member
Trusted Member
New West

And guess what? Lindsay said a long time ago he would vote No on Trumps next pick! Guaranteed, he’ll have followers…..

sjmom
Member
Noble Member
sjmom

Graham? I never heard that. Do you have a link?

New West
Member
Trusted Member
New West

Yes, he said it just after or towards the end of the Kavanaugh circus…It would have been on RS or Daily Wire likely….

New West
Member
Trusted Member
New West

He said if a pick comes up during the election year, he would vote no cause the R’s wouldn’t take Obama’s pick…Ugh! The big difference is Obama was done. Where as Trump is running for re-election.

sjmom
Member
Noble Member
sjmom

That’s next year 2020………….not in 2019

New West
Member
Trusted Member
New West

Yes it is. One can hope it happens this year but I doubt the Deep State will allow that to happen. They’ll drag Ruthy in there or have her be at home “working”.

sjmom
Member
Noble Member
sjmom

The Deep State can try but what happens if God has other ideas?????

Contemplator
Member
Member
Contemplator

The bigger difference is that currently, the Senate majority and the President share the same party.

New West
Member
Trusted Member
New West

Sort of…

Watchman
Member
Noble Member
Watchman

“By hook or by crook”… -Democrat motto.

Blackbeard
Member
Member
Blackbeard

Wha’ exactly be wrong wit’ a well-made hook?

Watchman
Member
Noble Member
Watchman

Sorry matey lol

Back to Top of Comments