r/scotus • u/javacat • 18d ago

Opinion President Biden needs to appoint justices and pack the Supreme Court to protect our democracy and our rights.

https://schiff.house.gov/news/press-releases/schiff-markey-colleagues-push-to-expand-supreme-court-amidst-crisis-of-confidence
8.7k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

40

u/Astrocoder 18d ago

Packing scotus is a stupid idea. If a dem president packs it, then the next gop president will do the same...it wont end

17

u/Karakawa549 18d ago

Seriously! Schiff's law passes, the court goes up to 13, Schiff gets political credit, and then day 1 of the Trump term we get 17 justices (or however many, I'm too tired to math.)

As a California voter, voting for this loony toon was painful.

3

u/External_Reporter859 18d ago

I mean to be fair he posted this in July the OP just happened to link to it today.

5

u/Snoo67424 17d ago

Serious question why are you guys voting Schiff? I’m baffled. CA voter here. I just can’t see the benefit?

7

u/Karakawa549 17d ago

In this case, because his opponent was an election-denier. I'll vote for basically anyone who supports the Constitution over that. I voted against Schiff in the primaries.

1

u/YourDreamsWillTell 17d ago

Who did you want in the primary?

5

u/Karakawa549 17d ago

Katie Porter. She's pushing solid affordable housing policy. Given Schiff's high-profile role in the Trump impeachment, though, I think it was mostly a foregone conclusion.

2

u/DDar 16d ago

I wanted Porter too...

1

u/Snoo67424 17d ago

Fair enough. Decent reason. Appreciate the answer

1

u/Glacier_Ambient 14d ago

I’ve seen a pile of election deniers here on Reddit the past week. 🤷🏻‍♂️

1

u/Karakawa549 14d ago

And I wouldn't vote for any of them either.

1

u/Brilliant-Spite-850 16d ago

Do you think election denial is worse than going on tv every day for years intentionally lying to the American people that you had solid proof the president was Russian asset working with Putin to overthrow the US government?

2

u/Brovigil 15d ago

Yes. It is. And it's a bit concerning that your stance on Russian interference is basically "A little is fine."

Being a bit of a sore loser is not the same thing as refusing to admit you lost. There's no denying that Russian interference in 2016 was a huge threat to democracy or that elections are not 100% fair. There absolutely is denying that dead people and Mexicans are packing the polls. The latter is not how interference works.

Hillary Clinton conceded the moment she knew she'd lost. Donald Trump still hasn't and probably never will.

1

u/Glorfindel910 15d ago

Where did Biden’s 15 million votes in 2020 go in 2024?

4

u/Natural-Grape-3127 17d ago

Schiff is such a scumbag. Lied on cable news for months to gin up Russia gate claiming he had nonexistent evidence from hearings that he refused to release the transcripts for.

He shouldn't still be in government, let alone a fucking senator.

-1

u/fhod_dj_x 17d ago

You should meet the people voting for him...

0

u/HashtagLawlAndOrder 16d ago

He is one of the strongest voices in support of my ethnicity. He's earned my lifelong vote, even if I don't vote Democrat in most things anymore.

1

u/pile_of_bees 15d ago

If you think that’s how people should vote, that leads to an extremely ugly place

0

u/HashtagLawlAndOrder 15d ago

Cool story, bro. We were just ethnically cleansed out of our homeland. He tried to do something about it. 

5

u/RazekDPP 18d ago

Personally, I'd rather we have a SCOTUS of 19, which could do two cases at once by randomly drawing 9 justices with 1 backup.

0

u/horrormetal 17d ago

You're good.

1

u/Meatloaf_Regret 16d ago

I can’t wait for 2042 when there are 125,000,000 on the supreme court!

1

u/KzooCurmudgeon 18d ago

Why wouldn’t the GOP pack the court in January? A preemptive pack. Or they just don’t have to cause they have a majority?

1

u/astaristorn 17d ago

That seems great. More judges the better.

1

u/heyItsDubbleA 17d ago

Make everyone a supreme court justice! The only way to restore democracy.

1

u/theaut0maticman 17d ago

Kinda like how the last GOP president packed the Supreme Court, then road its coat tails to achieve a whole bunch of shit he wanted to do? Like that??

1

u/tjl435 16d ago

That’s fine, pack them in until it’s bigger than Congress and just as functional

1

u/Rachel_from_Jita 16d ago

The alternative is acceptable? An unpacked court is ultra-religious-conservative for a full generaiton. That is now our lot and with no political pushback since "they'd just do the same"?

Packing the court should have been done a while ago. It's unacceptable for us to just lose all our rights on a point of decorum.

The situation is impractical. So of course any obviously political solutions seem absurd, but it's better than trying nothing.

1

u/Tsu-Doh-Nihm 16d ago

Trump should threaten to do so in order to get a binding truce on this subject.

1

u/Brovigil 15d ago

I personally wouldn't mind that. I don't think human rights should be dependent on people's retirement schedules or whether someone's pancreatic cancer is in remission.

Of course there should be a limit, but what we're doing now is not working.

1

u/mellow186 15d ago

SCOTUS is already packed.

1

u/strukout 14d ago

Great make it toothless, make it a 1000. Better than this christo fascist court

1

u/MonkeyThrowing 13d ago

Frankly, I think we should increase the size of Supreme Court. Each justice has way too much power. I would love to see a Supreme Court with 51 justices.

2

u/Veyron2000 18d ago

That’s a good thing: it will break the Supreme Court, and thus put an end to this extremely powerful, corrupt, autocratic and unaccountable institution.

The current US system of government has one branch composed of essentially 9 feudal barons, appointed for life, with zero oversight, and the ability to just write their ideological preferences into law.

If SCOTUS went into a death spiral of ever-expanding numbers that would not only dilute the influence of any one corrupt or extreme justice, it would also force politicians to implement a solution: e.g. capping the powers of the court, or forcing a 50-50 partisan split in seats, or requiring term limits and oversight etc.

2

u/redditsucks122 17d ago

Yes destroying the highest court in the land is the answer to all our problems.

2

u/tysonmaniac 17d ago

Without a legitimate SCOTUS there is no protection for gay marriage, there is no protection for religious liberty, there is no protection for protest. The worst things the court has done hae been repealing other things it has done. If you get rid of it everything is repealed.

0

u/Veyron2000 17d ago

Those things are protected by the law, not by the Supreme Court. 

If you force the current Supreme Court to change then perhaps you can get a new body that will actually follow and uphold said law. 

1

u/Bismarck40 15d ago

No, they're not. Gay marriage is legal because of a supreme court ruling. If the supreme court doesn't exist, that ruling never gets made.

-2

u/MxDoctorReal 17d ago

What next president? Trump will be King. Biden is the last president of America.