'Stupid, Narcissistic Idiot': Victor Davis Hanson Recalls His Own Fang Fang Story to...
Eric Swalwell Runs to MS NOW and Claims the FBI Dropping Fang Fang...
Eric Swalwell in 2023: Don’t Take His Word He Did Nothing Wrong With...
The Rig Picture: Nancy Pelosi Warns That Trump Is Planning to Hack Our...
Hacked? UK Home Office Promises Grooming Gangs Inquiry, No More Policing of Social...
Celebs Sign Open Letter Demanding ICE Detention Facility Holding Children Be Shut Down
David French Says Trump Is the Worst Free-Speech President of His Lifetime
The TDS Crowd and Lib Media Do NOT Like Trump and Hegseth's Response...
LGBTQ Crowd Lobbies Worcester City Council to Become a 'Sanctuary City for the...
New Law Forces Boise Mayor to Take Down Pride Flag From City Hall
Rubio Tuesday
Voters Don't Love Republicans — But They're Terrified of Democrats
NBC News: ICE Will Be Stationed Outside Graduation Events for New Marines
Judge Blocks Construction of White House Ballroom Unless Congress Authorizes It
Disappointed Gov. Gavin Newsom Says Conversion Therapy Is Discredited Junk Science

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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement