Expand the SC to 11

[D_Master81]

I’m like most in this moment and want blood and retribution for the blatant assault the GOP has waged on the Judicial branch of this country. The emotional side of me says add 4 justices. But I think in the end that will just lead to wrangling back and forth over the number based on who’s in power. Plus to the shrinking moderates in the country it will likely be seen as a power grab.
But by adding only 2, you easily make the argument that the GOP has made the SC an extension of their party based on the actions of the past 4 years, 2 stolen seats and a blown up filibuster, and this is trying to maintain a semblance of a neutral court. The GOP can’t cry about a power grab, they will still have a 6-5 majority, but on major issues like Roe, Roberts won’t overturn it in my mind. But 6-3, it’s gone within 2 years. Thoughts?

[lagomorph777]

1. 13. Why waste time?

Enough with politeness. We have a country to save.

[LuvNewcastle]

2. 13. Fuck their feelings.

[MineralMan]

3. 13. The number of the original states.

That has a nice ring to it.

[Le Roi de Pot]

4. Aim for 15 and we will get 13

[Demsrule86]

5. We need a majority

[PCIntern]

6. 111, only Dems allowed to vote in the Senate for 300 years.

[Demsrule86]

10. My dream...indeed.

[Johnny2X2X]

7. 13!

Here's what people will say, "just wait until the Reps then raise it." So what, they're going to do that anyway, raise it to 13 now, get a bunch of good rulings for the people of the United States and then battle after that.

[Roland99]

8. 6-5 does nothing. Cut it to 7. kick off Beer Pong/Rapist and whatever the new nutcase is

then wait a few months and bump it back to 9!

[Drunken Irishman]

11. You can't kick off a justice.

They can be removed through impeachment but shrinking the court does not remove the seat. It just means when that seat is vacant, it won't be replaced.

[Roland99]

13. Article III doesn't really say, though, does it?

[Drunken Irishman]

15. It states they will hold their office during good behavior.

Thus, the only way to remove is via impeachment.

[Roland99]

17. thanks.

so...we still cut it. Maybe Thomas has an attack of conscience (HA!) or something else to where he leaves the bench. Maybe Roberts decides he's not dealing w/the clown show.

If we cut it to 8 and one of those bastards drops out, it's down to 5-3 (or perhaps, assuming a Biden win, waiting until someone DOES leave is best? then cut it by 1 and then ratchet it up to 11?)

Time to play with brass knuckles. Time to seriously f*ck with the repukes and do what is necessary to protect the constitution (and American lives and livelihoods)

[Drunken Irishman]

19. The problem is someone like Stephen Breyer.

He's 82. He probably wants to retire. You'd have to get him to retire, fill his seat and then do it or you'd lose his seat for good.

[Roland99]

21. or we just go all out - post #9

Expanding the court to 13 or 15 would greatly reduce the ability for a president to "pack the courts" as even 2-3 new seats in one term wouldn't have as much of an overall effect on the court

[Drunken Irishman]

22. Yes. Expending is better than contraction.

[dalton99a]

9. 15.

15 was the number proposed by both O'Rourke and Buttigieg during the primary, and they presented a good case for it

[Polybius]

16. I remember that

I also remember Biden and even Sanders saying it should remain at 9. Have they changed their minds?

[Roland99]

18. LONG-TERM, that reduces the ability of ANY president to "pack the courts"

[BGBD]

12. I'd say threaten to expand it to 15....

But offer the R's a deal where we would agree to leave it where it is so long as they agree to a constitutional amendment to end the electoral college and decide the Presidency by popular vote.

[jorgevlorgan]

24. At this point they are beyond deal making

We should work towards making as many territories states as possible. Starting with DC and PR. If the EC compact gets through, great. Otherwise adding more urban centric small populated states would create some level of balance to the perversely unbalanced Senate and EC

[Yavin4]

14. I say 13 and any Democrat in the Senate who does not go along gets primaried.

Hold their feet to the fire.

[kentuck]

20. 11 would be a more difficult number than 9 to manipulate.

13 would be better than 11.

Simply to avoid political manipulation.

[jorgevlorgan]

23. 15