Biden was right: Expanding the Supreme Court is a boneheaded idea
By Joe Concha
The demand has been a staple of media interviews since the U.S.
Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last week: Expand the Supreme
Court!
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.): “I believe we need to get some
confidence back in our court and that means we need more justices on
the United States Supreme Court.”
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.): “We can expand the court. Codify rights.
And move America forward again.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.): “Not only should we look at
expanding the Supreme Court, but I think we need to acknowledge that
the Supreme Court of the United States has very few checks and
balances.”
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.): “Again, I ask my colleagues in the Senate
what other judicial outrage must we endure from the illegitimate,
far-right majority on the Supreme Court before we act? Fight back and
expand the Court now.”
So, what kind of expansion are we talking about? Try moving from nine
judges, which has been in place for 150 years, to 13 judges. Why 13
judges? Because if a Democratic president adds four justices, the 6-3
conservative-to-liberal balance of the court will likely become a 7-6
advantage for the blue team.
But have Democrats really thought this thing through? Because let’s
say four justices are added while Democrats control the House, Senate
and White House. What does anyone think would happen when Republicans
take back the House and likely the Senate after the midterms? The GOP
would likely expand the 13-seat court to 17 seats, thus reestablishing
a three-seat majority with a 10-7 court. Perhaps down the road
Democrats will counter by expanding the court to 21 seats. And before
you know it, the Supreme Court will resemble an NFL roster.
Of course, very few journalists have bothered to present this scenario
when lawmakers make these kinds of declarations on television. Perhaps
the performance theater, and the prospect of going viral on social
media, is too tempting to interrupt.
This road has been traveled before when Democrats controlled all of
D.C., and it failed spectacularly despite Democrats having far greater
majorities in the House and a popular president.
The date was February 5, 1937, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt
introduced his proposal to expand the Supreme Court. The reasons are
similar to those today’s Democrats are talking about: Decisions by the
1937 court, which was decidedly conservative and thereby rejected key
components of the New Deal, simply could not stand. So, FDR decided
the only way to get what he wanted legislatively was to expand the
court to 15 justices.
“This plan of mine is not attacking of the court; it seeks to restore
the court to its rightful and historic place in our system of
constitutional government and to have it resume its high task of
building anew on the Constitution ‘a system of living law.’ The court
itself can best undo what the court has done,” Roosevelt said during
one of his famous fireside chats. Roosevelt also claimed the court
needed to be expanded to handle big case loads.
A law called the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937 was proposed
under this guise: For every justice over 70 years of age, the sitting
president could appoint an additional justice. This gambit would allow
for six additional justices to be appointed by Roosevelt, who would
face almost no resistance in the Democratic Senate.
But the president’s own party faced intense pressure from the public
to reject the plan. The Supreme Court was seen as hallowed ground not
to tinkered with by one man for obvious political gain. And in the
end, the Senate easily rejected the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill by
a vote of 70-22.
Today, President Biden deserves credit for his long opposition to
expanding the court.
“It was a bonehead idea,” Biden said as a senator in 1983. “It was a
terrible, terrible mistake to make. And it put in question, for an
entire decade, the independence of the most significant body —
including the Congress included in my view — in this country, the
Supreme Court of the United States of America.”
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre echoed that perspective
on the president’s behalf earlier this week.
“I was asked this question yesterday, and I’ve been asked it before —
and I think the president himself … about expanding the Court. That is
something that the president does not agree with. That is not
something that he wants to do,” Jean-Pierre told reporters on Air
Force One.
Expanding the Supreme Court was a bad idea in 1937 and 1983, and it’s
a bad idea now. But Democrats know their power is about to go away
after the next midterm elections and are throwing a Hail Mary that
will not see the end zone.
* * * * *
Joe Concha is a media and politics columnist.
By Joe Concha
The demand has been a staple of media interviews since the U.S.
Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last week: Expand the Supreme
Court!
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.): “I believe we need to get some
confidence back in our court and that means we need more justices on
the United States Supreme Court.”
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.): “We can expand the court. Codify rights.
And move America forward again.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.): “Not only should we look at
expanding the Supreme Court, but I think we need to acknowledge that
the Supreme Court of the United States has very few checks and
balances.”
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.): “Again, I ask my colleagues in the Senate
what other judicial outrage must we endure from the illegitimate,
far-right majority on the Supreme Court before we act? Fight back and
expand the Court now.”
So, what kind of expansion are we talking about? Try moving from nine
judges, which has been in place for 150 years, to 13 judges. Why 13
judges? Because if a Democratic president adds four justices, the 6-3
conservative-to-liberal balance of the court will likely become a 7-6
advantage for the blue team.
But have Democrats really thought this thing through? Because let’s
say four justices are added while Democrats control the House, Senate
and White House. What does anyone think would happen when Republicans
take back the House and likely the Senate after the midterms? The GOP
would likely expand the 13-seat court to 17 seats, thus reestablishing
a three-seat majority with a 10-7 court. Perhaps down the road
Democrats will counter by expanding the court to 21 seats. And before
you know it, the Supreme Court will resemble an NFL roster.
Of course, very few journalists have bothered to present this scenario
when lawmakers make these kinds of declarations on television. Perhaps
the performance theater, and the prospect of going viral on social
media, is too tempting to interrupt.
This road has been traveled before when Democrats controlled all of
D.C., and it failed spectacularly despite Democrats having far greater
majorities in the House and a popular president.
The date was February 5, 1937, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt
introduced his proposal to expand the Supreme Court. The reasons are
similar to those today’s Democrats are talking about: Decisions by the
1937 court, which was decidedly conservative and thereby rejected key
components of the New Deal, simply could not stand. So, FDR decided
the only way to get what he wanted legislatively was to expand the
court to 15 justices.
“This plan of mine is not attacking of the court; it seeks to restore
the court to its rightful and historic place in our system of
constitutional government and to have it resume its high task of
building anew on the Constitution ‘a system of living law.’ The court
itself can best undo what the court has done,” Roosevelt said during
one of his famous fireside chats. Roosevelt also claimed the court
needed to be expanded to handle big case loads.
A law called the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937 was proposed
under this guise: For every justice over 70 years of age, the sitting
president could appoint an additional justice. This gambit would allow
for six additional justices to be appointed by Roosevelt, who would
face almost no resistance in the Democratic Senate.
But the president’s own party faced intense pressure from the public
to reject the plan. The Supreme Court was seen as hallowed ground not
to tinkered with by one man for obvious political gain. And in the
end, the Senate easily rejected the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill by
a vote of 70-22.
Today, President Biden deserves credit for his long opposition to
expanding the court.
“It was a bonehead idea,” Biden said as a senator in 1983. “It was a
terrible, terrible mistake to make. And it put in question, for an
entire decade, the independence of the most significant body —
including the Congress included in my view — in this country, the
Supreme Court of the United States of America.”
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre echoed that perspective
on the president’s behalf earlier this week.
“I was asked this question yesterday, and I’ve been asked it before —
and I think the president himself … about expanding the Court. That is
something that the president does not agree with. That is not
something that he wants to do,” Jean-Pierre told reporters on Air
Force One.
Expanding the Supreme Court was a bad idea in 1937 and 1983, and it’s
a bad idea now. But Democrats know their power is about to go away
after the next midterm elections and are throwing a Hail Mary that
will not see the end zone.
* * * * *
Joe Concha is a media and politics columnist.
Follow