Skip to comments.Senate Republicans Move to Protect the Supreme Court With Constitutional Amendment
Posted on 10/22/2020 8:45:59 AM PDT by Kaslin
Every now and then, a man, a mission, and a moment all come together. Such is now the case with Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, who this week introduced, with several cosponsors, S.J.Res. 76, a constitutional amendment to hold the number of justices on the Supreme Court at nine.
Its an axiom of conservatism that If it is not necessary to change, then it is necessary not to change. In other words, in more modern language, if it aint broke, dont fix it. But what if it is broke? Or, worse still, what if you know that something working fine now is about to become broken? Doesnt it make sense to take steps to prevent the imminent breakdown?
Thats what Cruzs effort seeks to address. The Court is working fine now, but Cruz and anyone else paying attention know its about to be broken if Joe Biden wins the presidency and Democrats recapture control of the Senate.
For more than 150 years, the number of justices on the Supreme Court has been set, by law, at nine the Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate justices, in the words of the Judiciary Act of 1969. Through Reconstruction, two world wars, the Great Depression, the New Deal, the Cold War, the Great Society, the Reagan Revolution, 9/11 and its aftermath, the Great Recession, and now the Trump presidency and everything in between, almost all of us have agreed that nine was the appropriate number of justices on the Supreme Court. Almost all of us have agreed that this structure was the best way to preserve the integrity and independence of the Supreme Court, and protect our constitutional liberties.
(One time, though, one of us did not agree. That was back in 1937, when President Franklin Roosevelt, upset that the Supreme Court kept declaring unconstitutional key elements of his New Deal agenda, promoted the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill, otherwise known as Roosevelts court packing scheme. That bill which would have expanded the Court by adding up to six new justices was so unpopular that Roosevelt couldnt get it through the Senate, even though his own party controlled the body by the lopsided margin of 76-16.)
But now, in the wake of the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Judge Amy Coney Barrett nominated as her replacement, radical leftists and many Democrats want to blow up the agreement. Upset that they believe they will be in the ideological minority on the Court, they want to pack the Court, by adding new, additional seats that can be filled with new, liberal justices, so as to dilute the influence of the justices already there and make possible Supreme Court approval of their radical agenda.
The American people oppose this. According to a new New York Times/Sienna College poll of likely voters, 58 percent said Democrats should not look to increase the size of the Supreme Court, while just 31 percent said they were in favor of court-packing. Given the more than 150 years of stability on the Court, that essentially 2-to-1 opposition to packing the court should not be surprising.
Enter Cruz and his proposal. The constitutional amendment is as simple as can be: The Supreme Court of the United States shall be composed of nine justices. Pass it with a two-thirds vote of the House and Senate, then get it ratified by 38 states, and our worries about court-packing will be over.
Within 48 hours of introduction, the resolution had already acquired ten cosponsors, several of whom are in the closing stretches of competitive reelection campaigns. For them, the resolution offers a chance to drive a clear contrast with their liberal challengers, who are now placed between a rock and a hard place, forced to choose between the relatively small group of liberal base voters who want to pack the Court, and the larger group of voters who reject Court packing.
Thus, Cruzs effort has the benefit of being both good policy and good politics. The Senate should find time in these last days before the election to allow senators to vote on this critical issue. America is watching.
Lets see this one get passed!!
Go, Ted, go!
The constitutional amendment is as simple as can be: The Supreme Court of the United States shall be composed of nine justices. Pass it with a two-thirds vote of the House and Senate, then get it ratified by 38 states, and our worries about court-packing will be over.
This could be accomplished in a week (assuming all state leg are in session). But it won’t
The things our Founding Fathers did not think to do because they never thought they had to. They never envisioned a country populated with petulant children.
That raises an interesting question, and frankly I have no idea what the answer would be.
Let’s presume Biden were to win and expand the court to 16 justices.
Then sometime a year or two later the 38th. state votes to ratify.
Does the Court immediately go back down to nine? Or are the additional justices grandfathered in? And if it does go back to nine who decides which seven justices get the heave-ho?
Interesting and I have no idea on any of it.
A two-thirds vote of the House? I don’t think so.
Please read how Jackson, the founding Democrat President stacked the Supreme Court, his appointment of Taney from Maryland who became the longest reigning chief Justice, and how the Democrat stacked Supreme Court led to the Dred Scott decision and the Civil War.
History is trying to repeat itself.
Never get 2/3’s in either the House and Senate.
D’s will line up against it.
GOOD!!! Let the American people SEE the DEMOCRATS vote AGAINST IT!
2/3 vote of the Hiouse and Seante is required.
yep, that is the point. Put them on record now so we can take back the house.
It shouldn’t take an amendment anymore the it should take a wall but unfortunately these times make us have to stay one step ahead of the left.
“They never envisioned a country populated with petulant children.”
Well said, FRiend!
With all of the objections to George III in the Decloaration of Independence, our Founding Fathers could scarcely imagine the satanic and murderous evil of the Demonicrat political party seeking to destroy the Constitution of the United States.
Not just that they “never thought they had to”, it’s that they never conceived the possibility - much like a “right to vehicular travel” wasn’t considered because they couldn’t imagine governments would punish people for traveling without permission to use certain vehicles.
It'll just put everybody on the record.
For more than 150 years, the number of justices on the Supreme Court has been set, by law, at nine the Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate justices, in the words of the Judiciary Act of 1969.
Not 1969, *1869*!
“Never get 2/3s in either the House and Senate.
Ds will line up against it.”
Agreed. The only other way to pass the amendment would be through a Constitutional Convention, where the States would bypass Congress.
Yes, and they never thought to add anything about abortion or gay marriage either. To them. a woman killing her own child was simply unthinkable and so it's not in the Constitution. Likewise, a man wanting to stick his d*** in another man's a** was also unthinkable, so it's not in the Constitution either.
However, the Founding Fathers knew enough to know they didn't know it all, so they wrote that things not in the Constitution should be left to the states. I hope ACB will help put these awful things back to the states and, hopefully, someday, they can have their own Constitutional Amemndments banning them.
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.