The Patriot Post® · Even After Almost a Century, Dems Still Want to Pack the Court

Students of history can remember the era when President Franklin D. Roosevelt got so angry at the Supreme Court, which kept thwarting his ambitious plans, that he proposed legislation that could have added up to six new members to the body. According to the Federal Judiciary Center, “The law was never enacted by Congress, and Roosevelt lost a great deal of political support for having proposed it. Shortly after the president made the plan public, however, the Court upheld several government regulations of the type it had formerly found unconstitutional.” That led to the saying that “a switch in time saved nine.”

Fast-forward through decades of an activist Supreme Court, and finally, with the opportunity President Donald Trump had to appoint multiple justices — first gained through a shrewd decision by Mitch McConnell to hold off on confirming a justice until after the 2016 election — a court that could be classified as conservative emerged. Instead of Barack Obama’s choice of Merrick Garland — who later became President Autopen’s attorney general — the seat opened by Antonin Scalia’s death was held until the election passed, eventually filled by President Trump with Neil Gorsuch. The Left became even more frustrated as “swing vote” Anthony Kennedy retired and made way for Brett Kavanaugh, then blew its top when leftist icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg died and was replaced in a whirlwind confirmation by Trump’s choice of Amy Coney Barrett in 2020, despite Ginsburg’s passing just weeks before the presidential election.

All this made the Left mad, as cherished “progressive” policies like nationwide abortion on demand and the establishment of “majority minority” voting districts, among many others, have been swept aside by what they consider an “activist” court. That frustration showed last month when Democrats all but unanimously shot down a surprise proposal by Republicans to amend the Constitution to fix the number of Supreme Court justices at nine.

“As a messaging vote brought up by Republicans, it was revealing,” noted The Wall Street Journal editorial board. They went on to quote radical leftist Rep. Jamie Raskin, who whined, “MAGA’s proposal is to strip Congress of all authority in the matter, to freeze it and cement it permanently in the constitutional architecture for all time, with the suddenly magic number, nine. What’s going on here? Well, surprise, surprise, America, it’s another partisan power grab by MAGA.”

That utterly mischaracterizes things, but, naturally, the Democrats’ answer is a power grab of their own. Raskin’s House colleague Jim Clyburn insisted, “I think that we are in a position now that calls for some significant actions taken by the Congress and we ought to expand. Thirteen is a pretty good number. A baker’s dozen would be a good number to have on the court. And I would hope we would get people on the Court who will follow the constitutional underpinnings of this great nation of ours.”

Democrats have been talking about — and avoiding talking about — packing the Supreme Court since 2020, if not sooner.

Even so, Clyburn’s idea isn’t going over so well with some quarters of the Left, who may not want this issue to be the hill they die on in 2026. “Jim Clyburn ... is a powerful and respected member of Congress who has generally pushed this country in the right direction,” opined Austin Sarat, who is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College, “but his suggestion that the Supreme Court be expanded from nine justices to 13 is a waste of time and energy.” His op-ed at the far-left outlet MSNOW also cautioned Democrats, “The only useful plan is already known: win the presidency; win control of Congress. Use the appointment process to redirect the court. It’s a time-tested, tried-and-true formula, and it is the only one that will work for the future.”

Moreover, “The unhinged rhetoric reflects the importance of taking over the Court by Democrats who view the institution as a barrier to carrying out a radical agenda, including proposals that are considered unconstitutional,” warned constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley. “Liberal professors and pundits have identified a court takeover as essential to, as one law professor put it, guaranteeing that the Democrats never lose another national election. As former Attorney General Eric Holder and Democratic strategist James Carville have made clear, it is about power and guaranteeing its retention.”

It’s interesting, and certainly a nod to the ascendancy of radical leftists in the Democrat Party, that this subject is coming up now in much the same situation that led to FDR’s frustration.

While the Democrats could raise the idea should they win control of Congress next year, the real purpose in unearthing a 90-year lament is to make it an issue in the 2028 election. Ironically, the socialists that establishment Democrats are scared of and wish to cater to would rather eliminate the Supreme Court altogether. As the Democratic Socialists of America’s platform states, “Replace the President and Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress.”

So I have an idea: if it’s that important to Democrats, go ahead and expand the Court right now. Why wait? President Trump has done a reasonable job of selecting justices, so let’s run with the idea. Propose the legislation and call their bluff.

I know, that would be another “partisan power grab,” wouldn’t it, Rep. Raskin?