After the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, President Donald Trump nominated conservative judge Amy Coney Barrett to fill the seat. Before Ginsberg's death, the Supreme Court was 4 liberals and 5 conservatives, and in the likely event that the Republican-backed Barrett gets rushed to fill the seat, the court would become a 6-3 conservative majority. If the court becomes conservative many crucial rulings such as Roe v. Wade and the Affordable Care Act may get overturned but if the Democrats sweep the upcoming election, they will have the power to “pack the courts”. Expanding the number of seats in the Supreme Court in order to combat the conservative lean.
If Biden wins the election he would still need the approval of the house and senate to pack the courts, meaning Democrats would have to sweep the election for it to pass. Biden states that the US will hear his opinion on court-packing after the election is over, which Republicans have taken as a clear yes. If Biden decides not to pack the court, however, democrat rulings on issues, such as solving COVID and racial discrimination, may get overturned in the courts, halting any progress on the Democrat agendas to fix the broken America.
If the Democrats win the election, do you agree with packing the courts? Should they be allowed to pack the courts?
With the Trump Administration rushing to fill the seat of the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg, ensuring a conservative court weeks before the election, the Democrats will have to pack the court, and justifiably so.
All due respect, Packing the Courts is a very bad idea.
ReplyDeleteYes, the Conservative Judges would have a majority in the courts. However, courts have passed hands between Democrat and Republican Justices over the course of the parties history, with the justices appointed recently more-or-less being of equal Party and Political Philosophy. Packing the courts just because you loose that majority can be taken as a sign of a power grab, even if it isn't meant to be. In addition, this massive increase in Democratic control of the Courts would either result in a pure tie on certain laws, which would lead to a Crisis, or would be regarded as unfair to simply get the Democratic Parties way. Either way, this more or less Carte Blanche for the Democrats would be a grave overstep and disregarding of the Constitution. All in all, packing the Courts merely to counter a majority at one point in time would be, both seen as and by definition, Tyrannical.
For one, court-packing is 100% constitutional, just look up the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937. But also, who really attempted a power grab? Was it in 2016 when senate Republicans refused to consider Garland stating it was an election year and creating the McConnell rule, but then now refuse to abide by their own rules and are rushing to elect Barrett? Because the nomination of Barrett, just weeks before the election, is the real court-packing, with all due respect, and the Liberals are tired of being pushed around in the court for decades.
DeleteI understand the appeal of packing the courts, because the Republicans have gone against their past promises and RBG's dying wish in nominating a justice, but I do agree that it is a bad idea. Yes, the Democrats would have more of a majority for now, but when the Republicans are in power again, the courts could easily flip again, giving the Republicans an even larger majority. It also goes against the Constitution and 150 years of precedent. However, I doubt it will happen, because Biden has recently hinted he's opposed to packing the courts, saying he's "not a fan" of the idea. He's probably just holding out on revealing his opinion because he doesn't want to lose support from liberals who do support packing the court. Overall, packing the court would become dangerous in the long run, but I don't think that Biden will go through with it.
ReplyDeleteHe is saying he is "not a fan" now, but a 6-3 conservative majority in the courts would throw a wrench in liberal rulings, eventually forcing the Democrats to pack the courts. The refusing to vote on Garland and the nomination of Barrett is the real court packing, and all I see is liberals wanting to counter the packing that Republicans have been doing since 2016.
DeleteI agree that packing a courts is likely a bad idea and would likely cause repercussions at a later date. Having the majority is nice, but expanding the court has the potential to throw things off balance and create an even more imbalanced majority than what would be in place. Ella brings up a good point about how Biden won't pack the courts, but is hesitant to reveal that opinion for fear of losing support. This seems likely and I wouldn't expect the courts to get packed even if Biden wins. For the sake of discussion, though, I'll point out that packing the courts could be a necessary evil in the short term for Democrats to take charge on handling the current pandemic. It might not be something that's agreed with, but it could also be something that is very necessary.
ReplyDeleteWhile I see the benefits of packing the court, I don’t think it is a good idea in the long run. The short-term advantages, such as preventing the Democrats’ rulings on pressing issues like COVID-19 from being overturned, are evident, but I agree with Colin’s point that packing the court could have negative effects down the line. I think the reason Democrats support packing the courts is because of the concern that Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat will be filled by a conservative, but packing over-politicizes the judicial court. I also doubt Biden will pack the court if he wins. In a recent interview, he told ABC "The moment I answer that question, every headline in your papers will be about that,” showing that he’s likely avoiding the question in order to remain in control of the story the media is telling and stay ahead of criticism.
ReplyDeleteYes, I agree that "packing the courts" undermines the Supreme Court, which is supposed to be our highest-level, final safeguard against injustice in America. While I understand the appeal right now for Democrats, as Ella has mentioned, this would just open up the possibility for further expansion in the future, including by Republicans, which is the opposite of what Democrats are trying to accomplish now. In addition, once this practice starts, where does it end? Each time that a political party has control of Congress and the Presidency, they could theoretically add as many new justices as they want! Not to mention, Supreme Court justices are supposed to be impartial and fair anyway. In my opinion, one solution to this would be some sort of requirement to only seek out and approve new justices who are truly impartial and have a politically moderate history.
ReplyDeleteI do think that Packing the courts is morally wrong, the law of land should not swing depending on which party is in power. Also since the position is held for life the values held by the party that elected the judge may become old and not represent current America. However are they allowed to do it? I think yes they can. This is because there isn't really any law that says it cant happen. I also feel like packing the court is similar to the midnight appointment or the spoil system. People may not like it but I feel like its a norm people have followed since the beginning of the country. Maybe if there is a push to change this from happening be it laws or change of the norms then I would say no they cant pack the court.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Colin who said packing the courts can throw off balance and Pascal who said it shouldn't just swing based on which party is more powerful. But packing the court is no easy process, approval of the house and senate are no easy things to get. If a party can somehow get both the approval of the house and senate, packing the court is completely justified in my opinion. Sure it could become a little one-sided, but like Gabe said it is 100% constitutional and if somehow both the house and the senate approves then that must mean the majority of citizens also support it. I personally love balance and think balance should be maintained in the Supreme Court. In my opinion if the replacement of Ruth Bader Ginsburg is going to ruin the balance in the Supreme Court, then maybe Amy Coney Barrett isn't the best replacement.
ReplyDeletePacking the courts is a very interesting issue. I personally don't like packing the courts but it's very tough. If I was a Republican or Democrat, I would nominate a candidate that favors me and my policies. Unfortunately, that means packing the court. With an odd number of Supreme Court judges, the Court will always lean one way or the other but 5 to 4 favoring one party is what I think is the best option. Anything other than that will cause the Supreme Court to become biased for a while since judges serve a lifetime term. In terms of this new issue over Trump and Biden and who gets to decide to nominate the new judge, I believe that we should wait after the election. The Republicans themselves previously mentioned that they should wait till after the presidential election to determine the new judge. Let the people decide who'll be president and therefore who the next judge will favor!
ReplyDeleteIn alignment with pretty much everybody's comments, I too think that packing the Supreme Courts is overall a bad idea. We can't blame the Democrats for wanting to do this, they are a political party, and like the Republicans they want to expand their influence and control. While a democratic majority in all three branches would allow for things to get done faster, there are many things they can do with this power that would upset a large portion of the American populous. Supreme Court packing also shouldn't be turned into a political tool. If the Democrats pack the courts if they have a majority in Congress, it will set the precedent that this is a completely normal thing to do. The Republican's could easily justify doing this themselves if they were to take back Congress one day, because the Democrats did it. In the end this is all about Partisanship. Packing the courts only increases it, and the Democrats and Republicans will both be fine, but all the American people, conservative and liberal alike are the ones who suffer because of this partisanship.
ReplyDeleteThis post is closed; no more comments will be graded.
ReplyDelete