End the filibuster. Expand the court.

I don't think we have the votes to end the filibuster atm.

A 1 vote majority to end the filibuster. Then 1 vote to amend the Judiciary Act and expand the number of seats on the court, and then a 1 vote majority for each judge the president appoints after than.

Biden would seal his legacy by pushing Schumer to do this. Visionary leadership requires bold moves, and this would be a very bold move. So do it now.

I have no idea how many would vote for the filibuster on a bill to expand SCOTUS. We had two who refused to end it for pretty much anything but neither of them will be returning. One can hope Sinema is replaced with the much better Gallego but Manchin will be replaced by a Republican.

when the next Congress is seated?

It still needs to be voted on by the full Senate.

Unlike like some I really doubt the filibuster rule will be changed.

Legislation: Expanding the Supreme Court would require legislation passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President. Alternatively, a constitutional amendment could be proposed and ratified, but this is a much more difficult and lengthy process.

Proposal: A member of Congress would need to propose a bill outlining the expansion of the Supreme Court, specifying the number of additional justices to be added.

Congressional Approval: The bill would then need to pass both the House of Representatives and the Senate by a simple majority vote. This process involves committee hearings, debate, and amendments.

Presidential Approval: If the bill passes both houses of Congress, it would then be sent to the President for approval. The President can either sign the bill into law or veto it. If vetoed, Congress can attempt to override the veto with a two-thirds majority vote in both houses.

Implementation: Once signed into law, the expansion would take effect according to the timeline outlined in the legislation.

It's worth noting that expanding the Supreme Court is a highly contentious issue, and there would likely be significant debate, opposition, and potential legal challenges throughout the process. Additionally, the number of Supreme Court justices is not specified in the Constitution, so Congress has the authority to change the number through legislation. However, the size of the Court has been set at nine since 1869, so any attempt to expand it would likely face considerable political resistance and public scrutiny.

That 60 vote threshold would need to be overcome.

The answer provided was incorrect.

Or is it 51 for this?

Minority rule already is the case regardless of the makeup of the Senate. 90% of Americans have absolutely no influence on Federal policy. Regardless of who holds majorities in the House and Senate.

US policies continue to benefit the minority. The Electoral College skews our POTUS elections. There are many policies that make it impossible to overcome the power structure (banks, major industries (fossil fuels), weapon mfrs) such as the new laws making it illegal to protest pipelines here in Texas.

So why not quit pretending as though we all have some kind of equal opportunity here in America?

What do we have to lose?

I would propose it be 13. One for each district.

They could then expand the Court. If the filibuster isn’t removed it would take 60 Senators I believe.

Schumer doesn’t; Jeffries doesn’t. Biden doesn’t.

Now that they have heard the rantings of demented Alito, they may have reconsidered.

Not pack

And that there needs to be some balance offered, for the good of our country.

It seems obvious to many folks that this present Supreme Court is very political.

The court is packed and expanding is the only way to unpack it.

Expand the court or lose the ability to govern.

With the current SCOTUS majority, any legislation is subject to second guessing and reversal.

If Democrats refuse to kill the filibuster and expand the court, they will lose the ability to govern, either through obstruction and sabotage by SCOTUS, or by cynicism and apathy by the electorate, who will soon grow tired of Dems’ inability to codify Roe, address climate change, protect voting rights, and a host of other rights that have been decimated or are at risk of being removed.

Expanding the court to 13 seats, when there are 13 districts of federal appeals courts, is not an unreasonable or radical proposal.

If Biden can’t muster the political will and courage, then it will be up to President Whitmer, and a Dem congress with new leadership in 2028 to get it done.

https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/democrats-introduce-bill-to-expand-u-s-supreme-court/#:~:text=WASHINGTON%252C%2520D.C.%2520%E2%80%94%2520On%2520Tuesday%252C,from%2520nine%2520to%252013%2520justices.

… that three senators is substantially short of the minimum required of 51.

Possibly also worth pointing out that a 50/50 senate is the best we can hope for thisncycle

To posts essentially claiming that no (as in zero) officeholders want an expansion. That’s flat out incorrect.

Interesting list.

Adam Schiff, Katie Porter, Jamie Raskin and 58 other representatives .


https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/05/the-movement-to-expand-the-supreme-court-is-growing/

Without the Trumpers. Roe would still be law, but that's nothing to get angry about? THE GOP/MCCONNELL PACKED THE COURT. Don't come back with FDR era court packing shit to me.

You are not angry?

If there was any packing it was with the help of McConnell.

Imo we are doomed if they don't. Nice guys finish last. Take off the gloves, the SC is corrupt.

We could do away with the filibuster with 51. We could even go back to as long as you stay on the floor talking, you can filibuster. That would be acceptable to me.

Then we can pass everything we want if we regain the house as well.

Expand SCOTUS to match the number of appeals courts (13) which matches most of history.

Then put some teeth into lying on disclosure forms so that Alito and Thomas are more scared of jail than pissing off Leo and the rest of their benefactors. .

I haven’t heard any serious Democrat propose this step. I wouldn’t support it.

and president to out last enough of the putrid justices and appoint intelligent people instead.

that will never be changed. Will never be replaced or held accountable. Even though it's a clear and present danger, hopelessly corrupt and as outdated as a muzzle loader on a battlefield in a nuclear war.
Just ask them and just about every elected politician. Not going to happen.

apparently

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/05/the-movement-to-expand-the-supreme-court-is-growing/

Democrats won't do it. No republican will ever join with Democrats in adding to the court.

Wants That.”

and one bill was written to expand it and that bill has just sat there. That 60 votes needed are as hard to get as a unicorn is to catch. And no one will support doing away with the filibuster so it's not going to happen. There seems to be no will to do what has to be done. Look at the people who have the actual power to advance a court expansion and tell me which one's are for it.

True. You’re now moving the goalposts.

Have a nice day.

Johnson? Not gonna happen. Jefferies? He can't bring bills up to vote. Joe? He is against it? I don't see any other powerful people in the administration or other institutions talking about it. To me that's nobody. Sorry you don't like my wording, you can ignore it.

FDR attempted to expand the court in 1937 but it was was defeated by the Chief Justice and Roosevelt’s own party members

If an explanation of why it is needed is provided it would avoid negatives.

The population of the USA was just under 39 million in 1870.
It is now over 330 million.

There are 13 circuit court of appeals.
Roberts oversees the DC, Fourth and the Federal Circuits.
Alito and Kavanaugh oversee 2 circuits.
The remaining 6 oversee 1 circuit.

If there are 13 justices they each would only oversee one circuit.

Right now, we have 51 seats and at least two who would not end the filibuster. So, if we're talking about next year...

1) 60 with filibuster in place.
2) 50 if we get rid of the filibuster. Requires just 50 votes plus tiebreaker (whoever is VP).
3) Assuming we have 51 votes next year and get rid of the filibuster, we will need 50 votes to expand. Does every Dem support that?
4) If Biden is re-elected, would he even sign it? He said that he's against expansion.

That would certainly cause nearly everyone to vote for President. Obviously, I'm kidding.

Doesn't that make this discussion pointless?

Now with abortion ban. And possibly some other issues he might be more inclined to support it. Provided the votes are there.

He said he is opposed to the idea of expanding the Court. If he believes it is wrong he isn't going to change his mind for you.

Isn't that why we elected him?

And then you change it around.

While I wholly agree with the sentiment it would just lead to an ever expanding court as the Republicans would do the same in return once they regain power and the pendulum always swings back and forth triggering further expansions. Wouldn't be long before the court was the size of the Senate...

Democrats and those on the Left choosing to vote for Hillary in the battleground states was entirely doable and would have changed history and those who chose not to vote for her gave us the consequence of having Trump as president and allowing him to appoint 3 justices to the Supreme Court and giving them a solid 6-3 majority.
No expansion of the SCOTUS was needed.

That needs to be banned.