3 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Deutschmeister's avatar

What I'd like to know is, in light of what has happened with that and otherwise recently, if people still feel that the idea of "court packing," in the form of adding additional justices to the Supreme Court, was such a bad one after all. There is ample room for debate on that in both directions, but it seems to be a worthy discussion as to whether so much power and authority belong in the hands of just nine people who have essentially lifelong job security with no accountability. (Looking at you in particular here, Clarence.)

Expand full comment
MillennialExistential's avatar

I think court packing is a suboptimal solution, but I'd take it over the status quo.

In my mind, the real solution is to empanel each SCOTUS case with nine randomly selected circuit court judges. That way new appointments can't radically alter the partisan makeup of the court.

Also create provisions to prevent a judge from hearing a case they've already decided, and strict ethics and recusal standards.

Expand full comment
Migs's avatar

I wasn’t for it before but over the last few years I realized that my idea (very much Biden’s) of economic populism could slow down Trumpism was wrong and we need structural reform (more states, more justices, no filibuster). The problem is that doesn’t resonate with people. At least I don’t think so

Expand full comment