If the Biden Administration has its way, changes could soon occur that would allow for packing the Supreme Court with additional justices – of his choice.
While the administration launches what appears to be an all-out war against the Bill of Rights, many Americans are under the false belief the Supreme Court will step in and save them from a salivating tyranny. It would be easy to argue those Americans have been asleep twenty years, as the Supreme Court has stopped none of the despotism.
And now it could be even worse.
President Biden seeks to EXPAND the Supreme Court
Biden’s Administration is now following through on a plan it hinted at during its campaign. The plan is one designed to undo any of Trump’s progress in diluting the bench’s leftist influence.
Friday, April 9, Biden signed the “Executive Order on the Establishment of the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States.”
This commission will look at the possibility of packing the Supreme Court. In other words: Congress determines the number of justices on the Supreme Court. The court has had nine seats since 1869. Biden, however, is looking into his ability to add more so leftists will have the majority on the court. And thus outweigh any conservative voices.
According to the New York Times:
President Biden on Friday ordered a 180-day study of adding seats to the Supreme Court, making good on a campaign-year promise to establish a bipartisan commission to examine the potentially explosive subjects of expanding the court or setting term limits for justices.
The President acted under pressure from activists pushing for more seats to alter the ideological balance of the court after President Donald J. Trump appointed three justices, including one to a seat that Republicans had blocked his predecessor, Barack Obama, from filling for almost a year.
Members of the Presidential Commission
Biden has charged the 36-member commission with examining the history of the court, past changes to the process of nominating justices, and potential consequences to altering the court’s size. Bob Bauer leads the panel. Bauer served as White House counsel for one of the most anti-Bill of Rights Administrations in American History, the Obama administration. Cristina Rodriguez, another Obama-era holdover and a Yale Law Professor who served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General under Obama, is also on the commission.
Other members include liberal scholars like Laurence H. Tribe, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, and popular among the liberal legal community. Caroline Frederickson, the former President of the American Constitution Society, also serves on the commission.
There are some “conservative” members as well. For example, Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law School professor, who was a top Justice Department official under the Constitution-shredding Bush administration. Also, Adam White, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and professor at Antonin Scalia Law School. Keith E. Whittington, a professor of politics at Princeton University, is also a member.
82-year-old liberal justice Stephen G. Breyer opposes Biden’s beginning attempts at packing the courts.
“I hope and expect that the court will retain its authority,” he said. “But that authority, like the rule of law, depends on trust, a trust that the court is guided by legal principle, not politics. Structural alteration motivated by the perception of political influence can only feed that perception, further eroding that trust.”
Is this Biden’s attempt at a Supreme Court “rubber stamp” on every leftist agenda item presented?
Guns? 1st Amendment? 4th Amendment? All gone. Everything will be subject to the “living document” theory and a thorough reading of the Communist Manifesto.
Packing the court is not a new idea. Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted to do so in 1937 with the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937. He proposed adding more justices to the SCOTUS to obtain favorable rulings toward the New Deal that the court had previously ruled unconstitutional. The bill would have allowed the President to appoint an additional justice to the SCOTUS. (Up to a maximum of six for every court member over 70 years and six months.)
Since the US Constitution does not specify how many Court Justices must be on the bench, Roosevelt argued, perhaps correctly, that it is within the power of Congress to change or adjust that number.
Roosevelt’s plan to pack the Supreme Court failed, but will Biden’s?
Roosevelt’s plan ultimately failed because principled members of his party held up the bill in Congress, preventing it from being passed. In 2021, we know full well there are no principled members of the Democratic party and virtually none in the Republican party.
The New York Post has commented:
Packing the Supreme Court is a terrible idea and always has been. President Franklin Roosevelt sought to enlarge the court simply so he could appoint a majority of the justices. He failed badly because even his own party recoiled at the naked effort to end the Constitution’s checks on his power.
So it’s obscene that President Joe Biden is even entertaining the move now.
Biden is appointing a commission to look into the idea, one the White House says will be “a bipartisan group of experts on the Court and the Court reform debate.” Let’s hope that’s just a bone to quiet the lefties down, not the start of something more.
I wouldn’t bet on it being a “bone thrown to the lefties.” I would suggest looking at it as an attempt to release the dogs on the holder of the bone. Radical leftists have been empowered over the past few years. Since the Presidential election, there is no cause to believe that either reason or principles will stop the intensely empowered leftists now.
Do you think Biden will succeed in packing the Supreme Court?
Do you think that the rules will be changed to allow for more justices? What will that mean for the Bill of Rights? Share your thoughts in the comments.
About Robert
Robert Wheeler has been quietly researching world events for two decades. After witnessing the global network of NGOs and several ‘Revolutions’ they engineered in a number of different countries, Wheeler began analyzing current events through these lenses.
I don’t believe he’s got the support needed and it’ll only lead to chaos with every administration as they will also seek to change it to their benefit.
It doesn’t mean they won’t try though. These folks at the end of their lifespan are trying too hard at the long game because they got outsmarted and are fearful to see their life’s work disappear in a moment without remembrance or meaning.
“I don’t believe he’s got the support needed”
well he didn’t have the support needed to be elected either, but there he stands, propped up and drooling and doing/saying what he’s told. his handlers can smell total victory within reach and they wouldn’t have launched this effort unless everything already was lined up.
Obviously he had enough support. You going to make any real comments or just sharpshoot everything yet again today?
“Obviously he had enough support.”
then obviously he has enough support.
“You going to make any real comments”
… ? here? most blog posters don’t respond to real comments.
It’s not everyone else aka the blog posters that are the issue it’s you
“it’s you”
well I definitely don’t fit in with most blogs, that’s true. I look at the blog titles and think “oh the blog is about this and that” and plow right in with this and that. but most blogs are not about their stated subject but actually are more entertainment venues for a mutually-reinforcing circle of insiders (whether they mean to be or not) and so yeah I don’t fit in and the regulars get irritated and say “you satanic parasite” and other such.
some people find my posts helpful. you don’t have to read them if you don’t want to.
I’d love not to read them but you make sure that’s unavoidable
I’ve told you before and I’ll remind you again that if you don’t want me saying anything to you stop sharpshooting on my posts.
You make your comments and I’ll make mine. You stay off mine and I’ll reciprocate
What Matt in OK said.
“I’d love not to read them but you make sure that’s unavoidable”
? it’s easy. see “ant7”, hit page-down.
“if you don’t want me saying anything to you stop sharpshooting on my posts”
? you can reply to me all you want, go for it. as for me I don’t reply to people but to the posts themselves – who types them up is irrelevant and I don’t look at the name.
I’ve been hearing this from lots of smart guys and analysts (like George Gammon, Matt Bracken, CSH, even Peter Schiff lol and many others) for well over a year. This has been forecast even before the 2020 election debates started.
They will attempt it, because they believe it’s a way to turn U.S. into Venezuela and warrant the DEMs in charge forever. That, and opening borders to immigrants who’ll become voters, obviously DEM voters. Among other less obvious strategies.
As Robert said, its been tried before.
It almost happened under FDR. The only reason it didn’t is because SCOTUS caved and voted the way he wanted.
.
I wonder if it would be any different this time.
I think they will make some weak conclusion or recommendation that it is not feasible at this time.
The Biden admin can claim they kept their campaign promise but will abide by the commissions recommendation and keep the status quo.
Jonathan Turley had an article about how he recommended expanding the court to 17 or 19 justices . . . 20 years ago. It would be a slow process where no WH admin had a short term majority advantage. The process would take many years and or WH admins. That is the difference between reforming and packing.
Trust in the media, the government, and corporations are already at an all time low. Packing the court for obvious political means will only further erode that trust.
At this point in time there are those who prefer to maintain the status quo be it the Supreme Court or the Filibuster. And there are others who would gladly pack the court and end the Filibuster to get their agenda passed and or ensure one-party rule.
“Trust in the media, the government, and corporations are already at an all time low. Packing the court for obvious political means will only further erode that trust.”
they don’t care about trust, they care about power. for them trust is simply a means to gain power, and if that trust is eroding then they’ll act now before it erodes further. once the power is gained they’ll cast off all notion of trust and consent and rule by raw force.
In a interview with NPR July 24, 2019, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg thought packing the court was a bad idea.
Recently Justice Stephen Breyer spoke out against packing the court. Of interesting note, a number of liberal MSM pundits called for his cancellation for the remark.
All of us must pray for God’s intervention to stop this.If the (D) Socialists and CCP/Marxist puppet senile dementia Joe Biden get their way,the Constitution of the United States of America and the USA will cease to exist,and Marxist/Communist tyranny will reign.
“pray for God’s intervention to stop this.”
what if it’s god that’s doing this? the bible has numerous examples of god judging nations ….
the make-up of this commission tells you what will happen. do you see any conservatives on the commission?
I have lived a happy 80 years, and expect to be just as happy for my remaining years on this earth. I don’t think that those who are out to destroy this country can act fast enough to affect my wife and me. However, I have children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren whose lives I fear for very much. I can very clearly see Venezuela right here in these United States. In fact, If I were much younger, I would be looking for a much safer place to live. The USA is just about gone, folks. Get used to it.
“I would be looking for a much safer place to live”
is there one? I mean if the u.s. goes down, is there a place you would expect to continue to remain “safe”? seems like the only safe place is the place that is made safe.
At this point it is all Conjecture and Hype.
The chances of this happening is small, as it is likely that some Democrats would even vote for this.
Do to playing all these games, trying to push through their agenda, it is very likely to backfire in the mid term elections, if not before then. Many Democrats are aware of this and will be leery of going along with it.
All to often the Right is using this stuff to try to scare their base or anyone else who they can scare with it.
Don’t fall for fear based propaganda, there is a lot of it out there from Covid 19 stuff to stuff like this.
Time is not on the Liberals side and they know it.
Which is one reason why they are pushing this stuff, the other reason is to keep their Liberal base happy.
I expect a lot of bomb shell revelations about voter fraud, Covid 19 fraud and a few other frauds they were behind, to start breaking.
So they need their base happy so that they will support them through that, rather than falling away from them.
Consider their actions carefully and do be aware of what is going on, but don’t allow it to cause you undo concern, at least not at this point.
“it is very likely to backfire in the mid term elections”
they subverted and stole the last election, why would they not steal the next?
“All to often the Right is using this stuff to try to scare their base”
clearly they weren’t scared enough.
I certainly understand the motivation for this action. The Republigoons spent a year refusing to hear an Obama nomination for SCOTUS, but as soon as the Dumbocrats lost the Presidency, the ‘goons were thrilled to railroad through a nominee. That was clearly, clearly unfair. So this is more a just payback than a “packing the court” thing. If the “goons had just examined a candidate timely, they might conceivably have approved a really moderate Justice, which would be great for our country. Instead, they deliberately obstructed the process of the ‘dumbs, held up any action until they could get their way. So now, they might possibly get payback – in spades. If they’d just acted fairly, they still would control the court now, because of all the deaths during the Drumpf era. But there would be no justifiable antipathy from the ‘dumbs to the outrageous ‘goon behavior which so intensely biased the court.
“If they’d just acted fairly”
objective fairness requires that both sides follow the rules. but if one side views “fairness” as “our way” and anything else as “injustice” then it’s not possible to be fair with them. you say that the left is acting this way because they were treated “unfairly”, but that’s not so – they act this way on principle no matter what anyone else does. in so acting THEY are the ones setting the terms of engagement – “submission or elimination” – and so there’s not much else to do with them.
Let’s just start the revolt already
Well Yes …Anything dirty & underhanded OBiden has done it OR
Will do it…
Dear Daisy,
Thanks for all your hard work…much appreciated, ma’am!
Dave
“A law repugnant to the Constitution is void. An act of Congress repugnant to the Constitution cannot become a law. The Constitution supersedes all other laws and the individual’s rights shall be liberally enforced in favor of him, the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary.” –Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)
It really pivots at this point, on whether the Filibuster remains or not. If it goes, we can kiss the whole kit & caboodle goodbye. Is this just a threat to force the Court more to the Left? I believe it is. Will it succeed? That’s highly probable.