Posted on 10/01/2020 5:05:30 AM PDT by Kaslin
Amidst all of the night’s theatrics, the biggest news from Tuesday’s debate was what Joe Biden wouldn’t say, rather than anything President Donald Trump did. Once again, Biden refused to say whether he would expand the size of the Supreme Court to pack it with liberals. After the debate on CNN, his running mate, Senator Kamala Harris, also refused to answer the question.
It’s painfully obvious why Biden avoids the topic. His entire campaign strategy relies on winning over disaffected moderate voters who may not love Trump’s personality but don’t want to see far-left policies either. For these voters, Biden needs to portray himself as a moderate and so he cannot admit that he wants to create a permanent liberal majority on the court, one that would significantly restrict second amendment rights, defer to the federal government’s ever-growing administrative state, and make it harder to enforce our immigration laws.
The fact Biden refuses to commit to keeping the Supreme Court at nine justices makes it painstakingly obvious he will support expanding the Court; otherwise, he would come out against the idea. Trump and Republican candidates up and down the ballot must raise the profile of this issue. Not only would court-packing serve to negate President Trump’s three nominations to the court, thereby negating the will of we the people in the 2016 election, but it would also send us down a deeply escalatory path of parties changing the rules of the game every time they take power, turning our vibrant republic with its brilliant checks and balances into a majoritarian tyranny veering from one extreme to the other.
Senate Republicans should bring this issue to the forefront by voting on a constitutional amendment that would fix the size of our Supreme Court at nine justices. Indeed, Senator Marco Rubio and several of his colleagues already proposed such an amendment last year when court-packing seemed like a remote issue. Now, it is a clear and present danger to our republic, and every Senator should be put on the record.
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell can force a Senate vote on this amendment and put every Democrat on the record on this issue. Ideally, there would be the necessary sixty-seven votes to pass the Senate and send the bill to the House for a vote, and we could put to rest this dangerous idea. Realistically, enough Senate Democrats will vote “no” on this amendment to block its passage, but that will lay bare for voters Democrats’ true ambitions and clarify the massive stakes of this election. Such a vote will also raise pressure on Biden to formalize his position.
Democrats have gained among college-educated voters due to this narrative that Trump is a “norms-defying” and “institutions-destroying” President. In reality, Trump may talk differently than most Presidents but has respected America’s institutional structure. Our courts are intact, decisions respected. Heck, rather than fire Mueller, he answered questions from the special counsel while supplying thousands of documents.
Despite his “aww shucks” persona, Biden, and the Democrat Party he leads seek to truly transform our governing structure. They want a court that legislates their agenda rather than rule on the merits of the law, and so they will add as many justices as it takes to manufacture their preferred rulings. To do this, they will have to eliminate the Senate filibuster, an idea now endorsed by even former President Barack Obama. With the filibuster gone, Democrats could socialize healthcare, pass extremist federal abortion language, make Puerto Rico and Washington DC states, and unilaterally grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants in an effort to build a permanent electoral majority. They will change the legislative rules, the number of justices, the number of states, and even the number of citizens to achieve their preferred ends.
That is a norm-shattering agenda. That will break our institutions. And that will only further embitter a partisan divide that is ripping our nation apart. Once a political party starts amending a constitutional structure to achieve a partisan aim, we will descend down a slippery and dangerous slope. Putting Amy Coney Barrett on the Court will be utterly inconsequential if Democrats turn around immediately to add justices in their effort to erase Trump’s Presidency from the history books.
Senate Republicans should vote on a nine-justice constitutional amendment to safeguard our republic and show the Democrats for the arsonists they are. President Trump and Republicans should campaign heavily on this issue over the next five weeks to combat this falsehood that Biden will be a protector of our norms. The very essence of America is at stake.
This election is the Hildabeast's plan to be POTUS...what she thinks is her destiny.
*The Hildabeast still runs the DNC.
Read the amendment.
Hopefully on November 4 Biden will pack it in.
Biden gets 25thed.
Kamala picks Hillary VP.
Kamala gets Arkansas mafia’ed.
President Trump should pack the court right now (or pretend he’s about to.) Force the Democrats to make long, loud speeches about how unconstitutional court-packing is. Force THEM to pass the amendment to stop TRUMP from doing it. Even if Biden wins (doubtful unless they cheat, but) he’d still have 7 weeks to do it in.
the Luntz focus group for the first debate identified the number one reason undecideds don’t feel comfortable voting for Biden: They feel that he will be too radical on a wide range of policy issues and will blindly follow the radicalism of the progressive wing of his party.
Biden did not answer the court packing question in the debate. We need to make a bigger deal about his non answer and also go after all the other radical issues that he will not proclaim himself opposed to.
We win by making this a “Choice election” with Biden being the unacceptable super-radical choice.
This is the one thing Trump needs to hit Joe hard with. He could have done better with it. I think he will the next debate. Even Reagan had a bad night his first debate with Mondale. He recovered, so will Trump.
If this court-packing happens, the SCOTUS will become a DemSocRat Party rubber stamp, and we will become “Amerizuela,” with permanent tyrannical one-party rule.
At least, this is what the Rats hope and believe. But in fact, packing the court would be rejected by half of America, and any SCOTUS rulings would be considered the actions of traitors.
This would lead to a shooting Civil War, count on this 100%. Americans will not be enslaved under Communist tyranny without fighting back, and I mean kinetically and by every other means.
[I just left this comment on the Townhall “Court Packing” article. Please click over and give it a like if you have a spare moment.]
Yes we only have one month and everyone knows who Donald Trump is. We should focus on one and only one thing: defining who Joe Biden is.
How does the President unilaterally pack the court?
For no other reason than to watch liberal heads explode and witness new levels of hypocrisy, the day after Amy Barret is confirmed Trump should nominate 4 more justices and McConnel should promise a floor vote for each.
Unlike the Republicans, the Democrats work together as a team.
Without great thought I think the idea of a constitutional amendment, at least the idea of voting on it in the Senate, is a good idea. Put the Democrats on record. I need to hear more constitutional and long-term arguments for passage by 3/4th of the states legislatures. The devil is in the details and unintended consequences need to be explored.
Hey. The Chief Justice is a real “packer” now.
Chuckie Shumer said they will also ad two states along with packing the Court.
I have no idea. LOL! How would Biden do it?
Biden would do it with a Democrat controlled Senate and House.
President Trump doesn’t have a GOP controlled House.
It takes a trifecta to attempt some of these things.
I wonder how they’d react if he threatened to do it by Executive Order... the point is to force them to speak out on the issue and make a case for why it should not be done.
They would say Trump is being a dictator and the Judiciary Act (a law) sets the number on the Court, and not an Executive Order.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.