Do you have any doubt that the GOP would pack the Supreme Court if...

[ecdab]

they were not in control of it already, but controlled the levers of power needed to do so? You shouldn't. If we hold the House and take the Senate and Executive Branch, which we have good chance of doing if we work our asses off, we will find ourselves with the ability to expand the number of Justices on the High Court (and lower courts).

The GOP has made the courts into a nakedly political body. Let's not pretend that they have not. Let's not tie our own hands behind our back. We will need to fix the courts to achieve justice in this country. Let's gain the means to do so, and then do so.

The GOP has become a blood sucking monstrosity. Time to put a stake through their heart and end this tragic episode in American history.

[FBaggins]

1. "Do unto others before they can do unto you" is a tough sell

They had solid control after the 2016 elections and didn’t even bring it up.

Do I doubt that Mitch would do it if the situation were reversed? No. But it will be tough to convince others of that.

[ecdab]

3. That's not how you sell it.

This is a correction to the abuse of the judicial selection process that the GOP has subjected the American people to.

[Demsrule86]

19. Mitch has stolen two justices if he replaces Ginsberg by his own words...we have the right

to expand the courts...I would include the lower courts as well.

[ecdab]

25. exactly

[jimfields33]

12. I'm not sure. I know they didn't when FDR had 12 years.

FDR appointed 9 Supreme Court justices. I had to look that up.

[FBaggins]

16. To be fair... they didn't have a choice

They held a tiny majority in both houses for a few months before deaths put Democrats back in control of the senate, but there’s no way they could have packed the courts.

[no_hypocrisy]

2. Republicans would have nine justices (not just a majority) in the USSC

and keep the process to prevent even a single Democratic nominee from joining The Court.

[BeyondGeography]

4. The whole thing is an absolute train wreck

We already have four of five conservative justices appointed by President’s who lost the popular vote; now we’re looking at five of six. What does it even matter what we do? Pack the court and it will be our turn at some point. Then what? I’m afraid we’re just going to have to take our medicine and learn how to fight harder and better.

[Vinca]

6. Sadly, I think you're right. Eventually other justices will leave one way or another and we

have to keep Democrats in control for multiple terms to rebalance the court. I haven't decided how I feel about court packing. Guess I'm worried that if we do it and then the GOP is in charge they'll do it on a grander scale and next thing you know there are 2 dozen justices.

[Pacifist Patriot]

7. Hard thing to change the Constitution, but in my opinion, SCJs should have 10 year terms.

Having a term beyond the length of the term limit for POTUS should handle the "being above politics" issue and eliminate this bullshit. I'd also limit them to two appointment terms. But alas, no one is asking me.

[onenote]

5. Why didn't they do so in 2027 or 3018

The court was closely divided and votes by Kennedy and/or Roberts cost them wind they wanted. So why didn’t they stack the deck when they had the chance?

[Alpeduez21]

8. They are doing as we write

Moscow Mitch blocked the nominees of Obama and they are stacking the court with conservative reoch wing fascist picks. Dems are too nice and too complacent to realize our country is being stolen. GOTV.

[ecdab]

10. That is the point, the GOP has already alternated rules and norms to pack the courts...

from eliminating the Senate filibuster for judicial nominations to having one set of rules for how to proceed with a late term appointment to SCOTUS when a Democrat is in White House and another set of rules when a Republican is.

The hand wringing and fear of what the GOP will do in retaliation is pointless, they are already doing it. The only question that remains is will we or will we not lay down in front of them and allow ourselves to be rolled over.

As for the folks that are asking the question "why didn't the GOP pack the courts previously" - the answer is obvious, they didn't need to, as they already had control. They have been able to take other steps to consolidate their power, such as Moscow Mitch packing the lower courts with his rules changing in the Senate and the blocking of President Obama from being able to execute his rightful duty to appoint a Supreme Court Justice 4 years ago.

[jimfields33]

14. He changed the rule on lower courts? I'm not so sure about that.

He did on Supreme Court though for sure.

[ecdab]

17. Moscow Mitch has made multiple rules change in the Senate to pack the lower courts.

The most notable being limiting debate on judicial nominees to 2 hours - even for those rated "unqualified" by the BAR. That's how they have stacked the lower courts in recent years with Liberty University graduates.

[jimfields33]

20. Got it. Thanks.

[Amishman]

9. Actually no, they had the opportunity in 2017

They could have both abolished the filibuster and stacked the court. They could have directly removed all obstacles and fully seized power. They didn't and a big part of Trump's horrible agenda got watered down or blocked.

[ecdab]

11. Trump doesn't have an agenda to block. Trump only collects power for himself, and the fight...

the rage, the conflict, the division is what he feeds on.

Trump hasn't cared about any of the SCOTUS ruling apart from how he can feed on them, neither does Moscow Mitch.

They have to keep their base enraged - total victory would end them, and they know this.

[themaguffin]

13. I don't care about rationale and neither does the GOP. They would do it and so should we. Period.

[MichMan]

15. Either side has had the opportunity

No one has tried since FDR proposed doing so 80 yrs ago.

[BlueWavePsych]

18. Let's get a super majority then

alter the rules with conviction and ruthlessness never seen before.
Take no prisoners.

[sl8]

21. They would do it if they could, even though they haven't, so we have to do it first? n/t

[ecdab]

24. What precedent has using the Senate solely to pack lower courts while a pandemic rages through our..

country set. What precedent did Moscow Mitch blocking the Garland nomination 4 years ago set?

They have already taken off the gloves and are beating our faces in. It's time for folks to realize we are losing this country because the GOP now believes that rules, ethics and precedents are for losers and suckers. The measure of what they will do is solely based on what they have the power to do, they have no other restraint.

We shouldn't lose ourselves, but to allow their unrestrained power grab is to lose ourselves and this country.

There are times when hard choices must be made, we are at that place.

[Ilsa]

23. I think they talked Kennedy into retiring so they could get Kavanaugh.

Made a deal to advance Kennedy's son in the party or something. Maybe it was more nefarious. I have no doubt they would twist the arms of other jurists if they could getaway with it.

I think the gop was clueless about 2018 elections until it was too late. They got lucky that their senate races were low risk, allowing them to keep control of the senate. The bad seeds in the gop need to be put out to pasture. I'm sorry to hear McGrath isn't likely to take out McConnell. Ron Johnson is another traitor that needs to go. There are plenty more that put party, power, and personal interests over country.