[TexasGurl24]

I’ve read an argument that packing is unconstitutional. There really is nothing from stopping a newly remade court from declaring packing to be unconstitutional.

What does the left do then?

[napscoordinator]

I’m not sure how that’s possible since it was done once in the 1800’s. The court went from 6 to 9 justices.

[Drew68]

I’ve read an argument that packing is unconstitutional. There really is nothing from stopping a newly remade court from declaring packing to be unconstitutional.

That's what I figured as well. The concept of judicial review. The current court would essentially have to agree to allow itself to be packed.

[volunbeer]

Packing the court would have to withstand judicial challenge at SCOTUS itself.

It is unconstitutional and where would it end? Each new party would simply come in and appoint enough judges to have the majority and by the time my kids die SCOTUS would look like the Senate and eventually congress.

That is not what our constitution prescribed. If they did it at SCOTUS they could do it at the circuit courts also. It would be a mess.

[centurion316]

I’ve read an argument that packing is unconstitutional.

The Constitution is silent on the size of the Supreme Court. The size has varied over the years. The Congress decides the numbers of Justices. Roosevelt was only stopped from expanding the Supreme Court by the Democrat Congress who did not want to do it.

However, the Supreme Court was rattled and became very reluctant to block any of Roosevelt's initiatives, some of which were clearly Unconstitutional.

[newzjunkey]

Congress can set the size of the court through the normal legislative process. that's how it's been done since the beginning. the size has changed several times but it's been set at 9 since the mid 1800s.

The Dems would need all both houses and White House and to completely end filibuster in the Senate to redefine the court so they can pack the court as FDR envisioned.