Salena Zito DROPS Broken, Bitter Old Crank John Cleese For His Shameful Trump...
Parental Control: MS NOW’s Katy Tur Defends ‘Mother of Three’ Narrative by Invoking...
Invasion Inversion: Mayor Jacob Frey Says Federal Agents Are the Real Invaders, Not...
Stage and Scream: Hollywood Director Judd Apatow Says America Is Living Under a...
Congressman Proves There Is Such a Thing as a Stupid Question
Author of 'How Fascism Works' Says Trump Is Leading an Unlawful Takeover of...
Jacob Frey Asked ICE a Gotcha Question About Red States That BACKFIRED in...
'It's Worse Than You're Seeing': Liberal-leaning Developer Claims ICE Terror in MN, Gets...
David Frum: The Minneapolis Shooting Was a MAGA Version of a Third-World Honor...
Lieu vs. Reality: Congressman Slams ICE Shove, Gets Slammed Back for Ignoring Man...
From MSNBC Flop to Georgetown Fellow: Mehdi Hasan Lands Qatari-Backed Gig
Hot Take: ICE Has No Jurisdiction Over US Citizens and Cannot Arrest Them
Bill Kristol: ‘MAGA Types’ a Half Century Ago Denounced ‘Agitators’ Giving Bull Connor...
Rep. Ilhan Omar Calls Elon Musk 'One of the Dumbest People on Earth'
VP of Saint Paul City Council Organizing Grocery Runs for Illegals So They...

Washington Post: Threatening to expand the Supreme Court is a good thing as long as Democrats are doing it

Packing the courts isn’t a new idea among Democrats, but as the Washington Post reports, Sen. Tim Kaine has said if President Trump confirms another Supreme Court nominee this year (they’re keeping a very close eye on Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s hospital visits), Democrats should consider adding seats to the Supreme Court. “If they show that they’re unwilling to respect precedent, rules and history, then they can’t feign surprise when others talk about using a statutory option that we have that’s fully constitutional in our availability.”

Advertisement

Funny that Kaine would worry about precedent and history when Democrats have been arguing for the elimination of the Electoral College ever since Trump won.

Paul Waldman argues in the Washington Post that Democrats packing the court would be a good thing:

You may recall that during the presidential primaries, multiple Democratic candidates expressed an openness to expanding the size of the court, which can be done with legislation. But Joe Biden was not among them. “I’m not prepared to go on and try to pack the court,” he said in July 2019, “because we’ll live to rue that day.”

But at that point, while the debate was deeply affected by the fate of Garland’s seat, it wasn’t about the particular scenario of a last-minute grab of yet another one. Democrats already find the current situation deeply offensive; they’ve won more votes in six of the past seven presidential elections yet conservatives control the court. Make it seven out of eight elections and a 6-to-3 conservative majority, and there would be a revolt in which even those who refused to consider enlarging the court might change their minds.

While the debate was deeply affected by the fate of Garland’s seat? When was it ever “Garland’s seat”? (May he rest in peace.)

Advertisement

So if the Supreme Court should be expanded, why not do it now?

Advertisement

Advertisement

Democrats have great respect for precedent and norms, it’s just that they want to pack the Supreme Court, eliminate the Senate, eliminate the Electoral College, etc. But it’s all good if they’re the ones in power.


Related:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos