This fall, the United States Supreme Court received a lot of attention. With ongoing litigation ranging from Texas law limiting when abortions can be performed, to vaccine warrants, and second modification rights, the spotlight is currently on the court. With so many high-profile cases and the public debate surrounding them, this recent attention has sparked another critical debate in the limelight – the wrapping of the courts.
Congressman Adrian Smith.
Since the 2016 election, Congressional Democrats have been fixated on their plans to fill the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is made up of nine justices, as it has done since 1869. Although the number of senators and representatives has increased since then, to reflect our growing population, it has not been necessary to expand the court. since its main task is to interpret the law; something having more judges would only complicate.
Despite the problems that adding more judges to the court would cause, Democrats have pushed to increase the number to thirteen, only because they dislike the current composition of the court, just as President Roosevelt has sought to pack the court in the 1930s for political reasons. Giving President Biden the power to appoint four new Supreme Court justices would put our government in the same category of dictators as Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, destroying the integrity of our justice system in one fell swoop.
To address the concerns of supporters of court packing, President Biden has formed a partisan commission to review and propose reforms to the court. Over the next month, President Biden’s Supreme Court commission will begin drafting its final report to the president. While it is not certain that this commission will recommend adding judges to the Supreme Court, it could suggest other workarounds such as term limits or age limits for judges, which could speed up the process of opening seats President Biden may fill. While these proposals may sound good because they would be touted as a “modernization” of the court, the main effect would be more frequent and intense politicization of the Supreme Court appointment and approval process by those who think so. that the main objective of the court should be to write new laws, without interpreting existing laws and determining whether they conform to our constitution.