Pro-abortion members of the US Senate are livid that a majority of the US Supreme Court justices now adhere to a strict constructionist philosophy, meaning they interpret the constitution, not legislate from the bench.
Therefore, it is highly unlikely that the new Court majority agree with the fabrication of a constitutional right to abortion until birth. And therein lies the rub, the far Left’s desire to pack the Supreme Court to protect abortion on demand.
They want to increase the US Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 and fill the additional vacancies with hard Left pro-abortion judges, thus obliterating the current pro-life majority.
This attempted Court Coup is another case of history repeating itself.
President Franklin Roosevelt attempted to pack the US Supreme Court in 1937 to advance his political agenda but it was met with widespread opposition, largely from his own party.
Taking a more cautious approach, Joe Biden created a 36-member bipartisan commission to study the possibility of rigging the US Supreme Court. Liberals outnumber conservatives on this commission by three to one, so the outcome will be a foregone conclusion.
While the opposition to Roosevelt’s attempted Court Coup was swift and united, Mr. Biden has vociferous cheerleaders in the US House and Senate egging him on and have introduced legislation advancing Court expansion.
But they may be spitting in the wind.
Some of the nation’s most liberal icons are on record opposing the idea of packing the Court.
The late Ruth Bader Ginsburg said, “Nine seems to be a good number, and it’s been that way for a long time.” She added, “I think that was a bad idea when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt tried to pack the court. If anything would make the court look partisan, it would be that — one side saying, ‘When we’re in power, we’re going to enlarge the number of judges, so we would have more people who would vote the way we want them to.’”
Lawrence Tribe, an outspoken liberal cautioned his political comrades. “Obviously partisan Court-expansion to negate the votes of justices whose views a party detests and whose legitimacy the party doubts could trigger a tit-for-tat spiral that would endanger the Supreme Court’s vital role in stabilizing the national political and legal system.”
Current Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, a liberal, said in a speech at Harvard law School, “It is wrong to think of the Court as another political institution. And it is doubly wrong to think of its members as junior league politicians. Structural alteration motivated by the perception of political influence can only feed that perception, further eroding that trust.”
And there is a growing list of Democrat Senators who’ve come out against packing the Court: Brian Schatz (HI), Michael Bennet (CO), Mark Kelly (AZ), Kyrsten Sinema (AZ), Joe Manchin (WV), Catherine Cortez Masto (NV), Tim Kaine (VA), and one Independent, Angus King (ME).
Recent history should be another deterrent, but evidence demonstrates that Progressives aren’t known for looking to past lessons when governing for the future.
They wouldn’t have to look far into history for an example of how court packing led to ruin in Venezuela. In 2004 President Hugo Chavez packed his nation’s highest court. It resulted in the independent judiciary becoming a political arm for dictatorial socialism.
There is no room in our republic for an “end justifies the means” style governing. Packing the US Supreme Court would be disastrous because it would make our judicial branch of government a political extension of the executive and legislative branches.
Defending Freedom. Defending LIFE,