I think we have a choice to make:
1) The Democrats are saying that they will pack the court. The Republicans could take a “noble” position and say that they are above such things, and you’ll never catch us doing anything so crass. That’s just one-sided disarmament, in my opinion, and then we all get stuck with a packed court with a strong Liberal slant. This choice, I think, is a bad one.
2) Republicans can note that the Democrats have been very vocal about the pressing need to pack the court, and so we ought to agree with them and get there first and toss 4 right-wing advocates on the court before the Democrats beat us to it. As you say, the Democrats might “one-up” us in this department the next time they get a chance, so perhaps this is no solution.
3) Both parties could push for congressional legislation locking the Court at 9 seats. I don’t think you need a Constitutional Amendment for this. Just pass a law that blocks either side from packing the court. And I would build into it a super-majority requirement to undo the 9-seat limit. Then things stay the same. NOTE: if the 9-seat cap cannot pass as a bipartisan bill, then it is ESSENTIAL for the Republicans to immediately pack the court by any means necessary.
So — allow the Democrats to win without opposition, or Republicans play to win and pack it before the Democrats do, or else both side join together and move to keep it at 9 seats in perpetuity.
If we sit and do nothing, the Democrats win big. That much should be blindingly obvious.
Number 3 sounds like the best solution. Neither party’s politicians care about justice, but hopefully they could all see the dangers of the ad absurdium case I outlined and realize it’s not in their best interests.
There’s no way the RINO Senate would agree to anything like this.
They can’t even move on an 80-20 issue like voting integrity.
If someone suggested packing the court, they’d soil their depends.