Posted on 07/18/2021 7:36:00 AM PDT by Kaslin
The U. S. Supreme Court issued two 6-3 decisions as it completed its last term, causing Democrats to renew their call for expanding the number of justices by four. Under President Biden, this would undoubtedly result in more liberal justices to uphold the agenda of the Democrat Party. The left’s court packing scheme, if successful, will weaken the constitutional system of checks and balances that preserves the American republic and protects against tyranny.
The Founding Fathers were wary of a powerful central government that would oppress and restrict the liberties of individuals. Their experience under Britain's tyranny made them determined to have a government “of the people” and not by a ruling elite.
Woven within this brilliant constitutional plan are checks that protect individuals from governmental tyranny and ensure that no branch of government can control other branches. Further, the balance of power between the federal government and the states preserves the ability of states to reflect their cultural heritage while maintaining a key part of the American republic.
Historically, these constitutional checks have worked well to protect the rights of individuals while at the same time ensuring an effective national government. Critical among such checks is the doctrine of judicial review, which allows the judiciary to declare certain enactments from the executive and legislative branches unconstitutional.
Judicial review is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. Still, it has been an integral part of the republic from our early days, with the issuance of the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison.
Since these early days, the three branches of the federal government have balanced each other. The executive has the power to void legislative enactments through the veto process, and the legislature can override such veto power. If the executive and legislative branches adopt unconstitutional legislation, the judiciary has the power to void such enactments. Likewise, the other branches may void a Supreme Court decision with appropriate legislation or a constitutional amendment.
The judiciary was never intended to be a political body that passes legislation or pursues a political agenda. This is the role of the elected representatives and is the essence of a constitutional republic. When Chief Justice John Roberts was nominated to the high court, he announced his beliefs that the role of the Supreme Court was similar to the role of an umpire in baseball — it calls balls and strikes as it sees them. However, it does not have a say in a particular political outcome.
It is a tragedy that in today’s political environment, the Supreme Court is viewed as a political player to achieve political outcomes. The shameful actions of the left in the confirmation hearings or Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh show how determined it is to achieve its political goals through judicial edict and not through the legislative process. In today’s political environment, the left sees the judiciary as its agent to push through an agenda that can’t be achieved through the people’s elected representatives.
This is what the Democrat court packing scheme is all about. With four new liberal justices on the Supreme Court, there will be nothing to stop the far-left Democrats from achieving everything their current progressive agenda seeks. With a unified majority in both houses of Congress, all that can stop them now is the judiciary’s exercise of judicial review.
Historically, the attempt to pack the Supreme Court by President Franklin Roosevelt failed miserably. Will history repeat itself? When President Biden served in the Senate, he denounced attempts to pack and control the Supreme Court. Sadly, he has failed to do so in the current situation.
The current clamor to pack the Supreme Court to achieve a far-left progressive agenda will become even more hysterical if, as expected by some, the court upholds the constitutionality of the Mississippi law that bans abortion after 15 weeks. Such a result will mean the demise of Roe v. Wade and will bring out the left in full force to demand that the makeup of the court be changed. Be prepared for the current intense political atmosphere regarding abortion to accelerate to a fever pitch when this happens.
Our essential system of constitutional checks and balances is in jeopardy due to Democrats' attempts to pack the high court. Let us pray that our United States Senate holds its ground and refuses to do so.
Democrats kinking the Constitution the the curb … their SOP since FDR.
“Democrat Attempts to Pack the Court Threaten Constitutional Checks and Balances”
Isn’t that the point?
“When Chief Justice John Roberts was nominated to the high court, he announced his beliefs that the role of the Supreme Court was similar to the role of an umpire in baseball — it calls balls and strikes as it sees them. However, it does not have a say in a particular political outcome.”
He lied about his own belief.
He has made the court political by (1) twisting law to suit a supposed “non-controversial outcome” (avoiding supposed controversy by approving Obamacare by twisting the definitions of taxes and penalties), (2) by avoiding hard Constitutional decisions and kicking the can down the road, leaving matters “settled” only barely, technically, incompletely and just for the moment. He operates as if the SCOTUS not deciding against Congress is leaving the SCOTUS apolitical. He is wrong. It is making the SCOTUS political.
The Founders erred in allowing Congress to fix the number of Supreme Court justices. So yes, Congress legally can pack the Court. As the author noted, it would upset our system of checks and balances.
But it would not be unconstitutional.
Both parties kicked the Constitution to the curb when they swore in a British subject/Kenyan/Indonesian in direct violation of that Constitution.
They have not “attempted to pack the court”.
Nobody has even introduced a bill into committee.
The operation of a political prison under the direct control of Congress, with habeas corpus and Amendments IV, V, and VI suspended threatens it a hell of a lot more.
“The Founders erred in allowing Congress to fix the number of Supreme Court justices. So yes, Congress legally can pack the Court. As the author noted, it would upset our system of checks and balances.
But it would not be unconstitutional.”
It could actually violate the Necessary and Proper Clause, Article I, Section 8.
What checks and balances? Seems the DEMs and the Deep State can blackmail/threaten anyone on the SCOTUS to get their way without any form of punishment.
Let them. The SC court is BS anyways.
Packing the court would cheapen the court even more than it already is.
I don’t fault the Democrats for using pressure tactics. I wish our side would do it. Their side is constantly pushing the envelope. Constantly advancing the ball. They are winning. Our side manages the status quo. One step forward, two steps back. All talk, no action. This can’t continue.
You know, it’s not actually necessary to talk about how bad the Republicans are when talking about how the Democrats are.
People don’t need reminding.
Yes, they do.
People here still want to re-elect the same Bush League Republicans that got us into this mess.
> It [court-packing] could actually violate the Necessary and Proper Clause, Article I, Section 8. <
Interestingly enough, the Necessary and Proper Clause is often given as the reason why court-packing is legal.
I think the bottom line is this. The size of the Supreme Court has been changed a couple of times over the years by acts of Congress. The Supreme Court has never objected to that. They have always deferred to Congress.
So given how weak most members of the Court are today, I’m guessing they won’t fuss too much.
I got news for you: Eisenhower rubber stamped FDR’s high handed lawlessness … he could have saved us with almost no cost but he chose to honor FDR over his oath of office … there are no white hats anymore, only the lesser of evils.
“Each state shall appoint, in such a manner as the legislature thereof may direct...”
Judicial meddling in violation of state law made the election unlawful.
Judicially-instigated Postal Service meddling in violation of state law made the election unlawful.
Official election fraud in violation of state law made the election unlawful.
We have no lawful President because the election was not conducted in a constitutional manner.
The United States legally lacks a President and can’t under law place a new person on the Supreme Court until early 2025.
Would Joe Biden like a Supreme Court written opinion on this matter?
Eisenhower had Operation Wetback to stop the invasion from Mexico.
Bush League Republicans are intentionally importing a permanent Democrat majority.
For Democrats, the constitution is so yesterday! They admit it publicly.
Reminds me of the lyrics of a song called “I’m a good old rebel”. Perfect anthem for the Democrats. THEY should be flying the stars and bars.
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.