Tag: Court-packing

Supreme Court Commission Comes Through

 

On April 9, President Biden issued an executive order to form a bipartisan presidential commission to examine possible reforms to the United States Supreme Court. The call came at the same time as a strong progressive push to expand the size of the court in order to allow the Democrats—with their wafer-thin control of the Senate—to add perhaps as many as four justices to the court. The plan was to convert a six-three Republican majority into a seven-six Democratic majority—assuming that the president could fill four seats with the midyear elections looming.

No more. After the issuance of the commission’s preliminary draft report, it seems that the push to “pack the court” is over. In general, the commission is to be highly commended for its preliminary work. Its exhaustive draft report has none of the signs of a political screed. Its long, thorough discussions are largely free of the inflammatory rhetoric that mars so much of the partisan debate on the role of the court. The report is well-written, scrupulously documented, and filled with arguments that start with “on the one hand,” only to move adroitly to address the issues “on the other hand.” Just that stylistic choice offers a strong sign that no controversial reform will occur. Meddling with Supreme Court tradition and practice requires a solid consensus about what is broken and an equally solid conviction of what counts as an appropriate cure.

On the court-packing issue, it is quite clear that the consensus is against the move. Indeed, I was both somewhat surprised and highly pleased with the carefulness of many of the major institutional submissions. The American Civil Liberties Union has, to say the least, taken positions that are different from mine on a wide number of issues, such as (in alphabetical order) affirmative action, abortion rights, campaign finance, and voting rights, to name a few. But the thoughtful submission by its national legal director, David Cole, sounded more like the ACLU of old, insisting that the dominant role of the courts is to protect those “unable to protect themselves through the political process,” which promptly led it to be “skeptical of proposals for court reform that would risk further politicizing the court or the processes for the selection of justices, such as proposal to increase the court’s size.”

Join Jim and Greg as they welcome Arizona Democratic Sen.  Mark Kelly opposing expansion of the U.S. Supreme Court under any circumstances. They also wince as Virginia announces there will be no accelerated high school math classes until the 11th grade. And they have very different reactions to the news that Caitlyn Jenner is running for governor in California.

 

Join Jim and Greg as they welcome an appeals court decision upholding an Ohio ban on abortions because the unborn baby has Down Syndrome. They also fume as the intel community admits there is only low to moderate confidence in last year’s reports that Russia was offering bounties to the Taliban and its allies for killing coalition forces in Afghanistan. And they shake their heads at the obvious court-packing hypocrisy of Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey.

Join Jim and Greg as they shred the blatantly partisan attempt by congressional Democrats to add four more seats (meaning lefties) to the U.S. Supreme Court but welcome House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announcing she has “no plans” to bring the bill up for a vote. They also react to the new polling showing a sharp drop in public confidence in the Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine since the FDA ordered a pause this week. And they examine how Michigan’s COVID numbers are very high but interest in the vaccine is quite low.

Join Jim and Greg as they update the “incident” at the Natanz nuclear site and enjoy learning how it was much more devastating than first reported. Then they feel very weird agreeing with former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid but believe he right to warn the Democrats against court packing. They discuss the significance of the FDA and CDC calling for a pause in administering the Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine. And they discuss the inexplicable error of a Minnesota police officer in a recent shooting death there but also hammer Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib for suggesting this case is further proof that we need to abolish police and incarceration.

Join Jim and Greg as they cheer the confirmation of Justice Amy Coney Barrett. They also discuss the Philadelphia police-involved shooting of a man advancing toward officers with a knife and the resulting violence that left 30 officers injured, including 12 in the hospital. And they break down the left’s unhinged reaction to the Barrett confirmation – from immediate calls for court packing to claiming originalism is racist – while Jim points out that the left probably ought to blame Ruth Bader Ginsburg for Barrett being on the court.

Join Jim and Greg as they discuss Joe Biden now promising to create a bipartisan commission to study reforming the courts and Jim explains why he thinks this is Biden’s way of letting the idea die. They also weigh in on Sacha Baron Cohen’s attempt to portray Rudy Giuliani as acting lewd with a minor and how Rudy could probably use better judgment. And they take a long look at the growing scandal involving Joe and Hunter Biden’s business dealings and why this is a big problem for Biden even if he wins the election.

Join Jim and Greg as they mark ten years of the 3 Martini Lunch! First they discuss two stories so bad and crazy they’re actually good. They discuss how the Democrats are planning to pack the Supreme Court and act like they had no choice because the GOP Senate filled a seat on the court just before an election. They also hammer New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo for saying the CDC and FDA cannot be trusted to tell the public if a coronavirus vaccine is safe. And they reflect back on a number of highlights from the 3 Martini Lunch over the past decade.

Join Jim and Greg as they cheer Mike Pence for a solid debate and putting Kamala Harris on defense over court packing, the economy, the Green New Deal, fracking and more. They also discuss how Harris once again showed she is overrated as a debater and how the media tried to change the discussion after the debate to how Harris was somehow at a disadvantage because she’s a woman. And they serve up a double shot of crazy as the Commission on Presidential Debates announces next week’s debate will be virtual and President Trump immediately rejects the idea.

Join Jim and Greg as they dig into what we witnessed in the first presidential debate on Tuesday. They discuss the constant crosstalk and why Trump would have been smarter to let Biden tangle himself in his own incomprehensible rhetoric. They also detail how both candidates handled the urban violence issue and Biden’s insistence on refusing to have an opinion on adding justices to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Join Jim and Greg as they mix serious and lighthearted analysis of Tuesday’s first presidential debate.  They also hammer election officials around the country for consistently making easily avoidable mistakes with absentee ballots that will only fuel mistrust in the process.  And they slam Kamala Harris for dodging whether she and Biden would embrace court packing, and her response is even more pathetic than Biden’s.