The whole thing with this is that packing the supreme court *would be* a partisan move against an ostensibly independent body notionally about the rule of law. It is valid as a tactic *because* it has already been packed and already stopped being an independent body notionally about the rule of law.

Jjamellebouie.netOct 5, 2024 2:06am

ah yes, what is worse? passing a law through congress to add more seats to the supreme court — as per congress’ explicitly stated constitutional authority — or a violent coup to overturn the constitutional order?

Not to mention purple states (AZ and GA) increased their supreme courts in 2016 when they had unified GOP control, so they could protect against the drift away from being deep red. It’s worked striping women of rights and upholding abortion restrictions.

I don’t remember the case, but Scalia once wrote in a dissent that the liberals on the Court will “go as far as they think they can get away with.” What was he referring to? What would happen if the Court went too far? He was clearly contemplating Congressional action, and maybe inviting it.

"an ostensibly independent body notionally about the rule of law" is a myth. an appealing myth, but it's NEVER been the case, and it really can't be, given how our system works. that's part of why i favor disempowering reforms, such as jurisdiction-stripping: www.salon.com/2024/08/31/h...

How Kamala Harris can fight the renegade Supreme Court — and win

Sure, expanding the Supreme Court would help — but limiting its powers is even more important

The behavior of the Senate, in rubber-stamping unqualified individuals for the SC -- and I should say, the lower courts as well -- is also to blame here.

Precisely what you said. This year's decisions have made constitutional law teachers genuinely unsure what is left to teach this fall.

this is why "unpacking" the court is the way to sell it. Cuts bad-faith Ponnuru arguments off at the knees.

Truth.

Also, the Supreme Court is supposed to be opposed! That’s the entire structure of the government, each branch checks another. The idea that the court is somehow separate and above that is a very recent invention.

Just as a practical matter, if we add 3 justices, Republicans will add 6. They will probably control the senate for several decades, and get a president about half the time.

Also, the court was made that way by several 51-49 Senate votes; “ignoring the filibuster in order to undo something else which ignored the filibuster” seems like a reasonable excuse even for people who think the filibuster is a good thing.