Posted on 10/13/2020 4:36:10 AM PDT by Kaslin
Editor's Note: This column is co-authored by Tim Groseclose, a professor of economics at George Mason University, where he holds the Adam Smith Chair at the Mercatus Center.
Exponential growth. It's why plagues are so dangerous and compound interest is so wonderful.
It's also why the Democrats' flirting with court packing could destroy the Supreme Court and, with it, America as we know it.
The following is a reasonable scenario:
Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed to the Supreme Court, which gives conservatives a 6-3 advantage (or 5-4, given that Chief Justice John Roberts has essentially become a swing vote).
Then, in January, having retained the Democrat-majority House, a President Joe Biden and a newly Democrat-controlled Senate decide to undo the advantage. Congress passes and Biden signs a new law expanding the Court to 15 members. Biden appoints six new liberal justices, handing the left a 9-6 majority -- a 60% advantage.
What happens when the Republicans regain power and they want a 60% conservative advantage? As a bit of algebra shows, to reverse the Democrats' 9-6 advantage, they'd have to expand the Court by 7.5 members. Of course, they can't nominate half a justice, so they'd probably round up to eight. Regardless, the Republicans, to gain a 60% advantage, must expand the Court by more than the Democrats did -- by eight, as opposed to six.
The parties would surely continue to insist upon a 60% advantage, meaning that, with each switch in power, they'd have to expand the Court's size by 50%. The key thing to note is that they would have to expand the court not by a constant number but by a constant percentage This is what would cause exponential growth. If, for example, one side insisted on a 65% advantage and the other followed suit, they'd have to expand the Court by 86% at each switch in power.
How often would such switches in power occur? One occurred in 1992, when Democrats won the House, Senate and presidency. Others occurred in 2000, 2008 and 2016. And if the polls are right, another will occur in 2020. Such power switches occur about every eight years, perhaps slightly more frequently.
Let's err on the side of being less alarmist and assume that the switch would only occur every 10 years. Let's similarly assume that the parties would only insist upon a 60% advantage.
Under these minimal parameters, the Court would expand by 50% every 10 years. In 100 years, the Court would grow by a factor of approximately 58 (1.5 raised to the power of 10), and instead of nine justices, the Supreme Court would consist of 522 justices.
Surely, one would be tempted to think, voters and the two parties would see these problems, and accordingly, such growth wouldn't continue. But why not? Imagine the following scenario: In the year 2120, the Court comprises 522 justices (313 conservatives and 209 liberals). That November, the Democrats retake the House, Senate and presidency. Following precedent, they decide to regain their advantage and expand the Court to 783 justices (470 liberals and 313 conservatives).
Some voters might say, "Enough is enough." However, Democrats could reasonably counter that (1) "It's what the Republicans did last time. It's our turn now"; (2) "Is 783 really that much larger than 522?"; (3) "Only by expanding the Court can we do things such as guarantee a woman's right to choose and ensure racial and social justice. Do we really want to sacrifice those goals just to keep the Court a smaller size?"
Further, in such a scenario, no voter would be able to remember when the Court was smaller than 40 justices, much less just nine. Would they really care if it were expanded a little more?
Of course, the scenario would continue to repeat.
In other words, if the Democrats do as many of their leading members want them to do (including Gov. Jay Inslee, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Mayor Pete Buttigieg), as The Atlantic urges them to do, as vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris told The New York Times she is "absolutely open to," and as at least one New York Times columnist advocates, we will no longer have a legislature and a supreme judicial branch. We will essentially have two legislatures (at least when Democratic appointees -- justices willing to read left-wing political and social goals into the Constitution -- hold the majority of seats).
It will be the end of the Supreme Court as we know it, the end of the balance of power among the three branches of government and, therefore, the end of America as we know it.
Would the Democrats do it? Given the left's record of destroying whatever it touches -- most obviously, the universities, high schools and journalism, and most recently, sports and the sciences -- if you are a betting person, you should bet on it.
This is yet another reason everything is at stake in this election.
“(or 5-4, given that Chief Justice John Roberts has essentially become a swing vote).”
...going right to left is pretty rare. Unless somebody has pictures of you with a goat in stockings in a hotel or something of that nature.
The Democrats would like it if every single person in America was a Supreme Court Justice.
If Roberts had any integrity left he would retire since they are blackmailing him.
What ever happened to Glenn Backs report on how he was being blackmailed?
It disappeared down the hole like his initial reports about Soros being the evil force behind a lot of stuff.
No one had heard about Soros before Beck, and Beck turned out to be 100% correct.
I am glad he’s done a 180 on trump - but he nearly lost his new company (the Blaze) as a result of it.
The premie is in error
The premise is that there will be democrats alive and functioning to destroy the American government
This is where the States HAVE to step in and finally have a convention if they do this, it’s a risk but it will have to happen.
Someone needs to remind the state legislatures that they do have power if they choose to wield it together, all I ask for is a reset of the justices to 9, term limits in the house an senate like they did to the President, and a balanced budget amendment except in time of a declared war. Everything else stands as it was written.
The will pick liberal courts and process every idiotic liberal plan they have.
They will use what I call “repeal to a third position” tactic that they successfully used in the past.
You start with position A. You enact a new law B that is the opposite of what you want, but badly worded that it fails constitutional challenge in court.
So it must be ‘repealed’.
But instead of going BACK TO A (the usual definition of ‘repeal’), you go to the new and opposite position C- which is what they wanted all along. Since B is unconstitutional, the OPPOSITE of B must be the new ‘law of the land’, entirely manufactured by the court.
They did this with gays in the military and gay marriage. But (not surprisingly) they said it didn’t apply to the whole country when 2nd amendment restrictions were found to be unconstitutional.
Premise is in error since it assumes the Demonrats would ever let the balance of power return to the GOP. With a majority in all branches, there’d never be a fair election again.
One man, one vote, one time - then hello, Venezuela.
What Will Happen If the Democrats Pack the Supreme Court?
—
Canada will suddenly look like a bastion of freedom
There would no longer be any swings in power. The RATs would rewrite the rules so they stay the rulers. Permanently.
Do any of you think for one minute that the Dem’s WON’T “pack the Court” if they win the Presidency and Senate in Nov?
I’m 100% sure they will. And they’ll destroy our system of government completely by doing so, as the Court will simply become an extended legislative branch to support whatever the Dems pass in the House and Senate, no matter how whacky (GND) or egregious (overturn 2A, etc).
Packing the court is a historical prelude to a dictatorship.
“What happens when the Republicans regain power and they want a 60% conservative advantage?”
Does Prager understnd the purpose of packing the court? The Republicans may regain power but liberty minded people will not.
Once the Dems have the SC we will immediately see a plethoria of new election laws such as porportional reresentation, mandatory balloting supported by mail and ballot harvesting. There will also be at least a weakenng of the electoral college and the admission of two Democratic states. Plus the census will be skewed to account for alll the “undercounting” in Dem States.
If the Commie-Rats win this time, I expect them to pass a number of laws to attempt to legalize all manor of voter fraud enabling them to become permanently in power. That will be a primary focus. Anything else they want, will be secondary.
Packing the court would not occur in a vacuum.
Complementing the effort, will be National Popular Vote, Ranked Choice Voting, return to Commie Core, Agenda 21, GNDeal, etc.
Right-they want to invalidate the SCOTUS just exactly the way they are succeeding in invalidating US citizenship, by bringing millions of illegals into the country.
Never mind the lengths they are going to, to invalidate every established law in the country along with the Constitution!
That would not surprise me if they did.
If the Libs win they will never let the Republicans gain control again.
Their new court would find all types of voter id unconstitutional and that illegal immigrants have a right to vote.
Be sure that if the pack the court then they will also pass a law, perhaps an amendment, fixing the court size to their new number.
Kind of silly.. if democrats pack the court there won’t ever be another republican senate majority.
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.