Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-NJ) is suggesting that adding more Supreme Court Justices would “reinvigorate our Constitution.” The claim, however, is baseless and would only serve a one-party system. The Supreme Court hadn’t added seats since 1869, when Ulysses S. Grant added two seats to make the nine that we have today. Grant did this for political reasons.
Pascrell tweeted, “I urge all my colleagues to support expanding the supreme court. Balancing the court will undo decades of republican court packing, reinvigorate our Constitution, and protect American democracy.”
The only reason Republicans have filled Supreme Court seats in previous years is because there was a seat open. Democrats would have had the opportunity to put their own justice in place had Ruth Bader Ginsburg resigned from the court while former President Barack Obama was in office. Instead, Ginsburg passed away during former President Donald Trump’s presidency and Trump filled the spot.
In June, Rep. Pramilla Jayapal (D-WA) used the same language in a tweet, “I’m a woman of color who’s had an abortion, is in a loving, interracial marriage, and has an amazing trans daughter. This extremist Supreme Court is a direct threat to me, my loved ones, and to millions of people all across this country. We need balance now. Expand the Court.”
By balance, Jayapal almost certainly means that the Supreme Court should have a Democrat majority.
Last week, Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-NY) tweeted, “Expand the Supreme Court before Clarence Thomas’ far-right dystopia becomes our reality.”
A couple of days later, Jones tweeted, “Republicans packed the Supreme Court playing by their own rules. Now the cascade of horrors won’t stop until Democrats use their power. Expanding the Court is more important than ever.”
But, Democrats don’t have the support to pack the court because Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) and Mark Kelly (D-AZ) have already voiced that they’re against it.
Democrats have a habit of only wanting to change things when it benefits them. Sen. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer famously compared ending the filibuster to a “rubber stamp of dictatorship,” but now he’s changed his tune and believes that the filibuster should end.
On the other hand, Republicans shouldn’t end the filibuster either. Having a threshold of votes to pass a specific bill is essential to the integrity of the U.S. and the laws that are created. Single-sided legislation doesn’t serve most Americans with balanced laws. It’s a dangerous precedent to set.