The Left Begins Its Push To Remake The Supreme Court

[Charlie T Waite]

It’s not an attempt pack the Court (yet, anyway), and it wouldn’t even change the ideological balance of the nine Supreme Court justices, but activists on the Left have officially begun their campaign to shape the direction of SCOTUS in the decades ahead.

POLITICO reports that the progressive activist group Demand Justice is campaigning for 82-year old Justice Stephen Breyer to retire from the Court, allowing Joe Biden to appoint a much younger justice who could conceivably sit on the bench until 2050.

“Justice Breyer’s service on the Court has been remarkable, and history will remember him even more fondly if he ends up playing a critical role in ensuring the appointment of the first Black woman to the Court,” said Brian Fallon, the group’s co-founder and executive director. “Timing his retirement in the coming year would guarantee that opportunity, and it would be wise to do so because the window may prove a narrow one.”

Fallon’s comments are the latest example of Democratic anxiety about the composition of the Supreme Court, where conservatives outnumber liberals six to three. And it illustrates how the left-wing of the party feels immediately emboldened to push Biden now that a Democratic Senate majority seems likely, however narrow.

Just as a quick aside; there is no “left-wing” of the Democrat party. There’s the socialist wing and the progressive wing.

Ultimately though, it’s not about either wing pushing Biden to push Breyer out the door. That’s going to be up to the justice himself. I’m sure Breyer has thought about Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s death and Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation to the vacant seat in the waning days of the Trump administration, but with Biden set to be inaugurated on January 20th and with Democrats in control of the Senate for at least two years (barring any unexpected retirements), the window of opportunity for a Democrat to replace Breyer is a little wider than Brian Fallon wants supporters to believe.

It’s also worth pointing out the breathtaking audaciousness of telling an 82-year old sitting Supreme Court justice that he should step down now, not because of his rulings or judicial philosophy, but because the Left wants to replace him with a younger black woman. It’s pure identity politics, and I suspect that actually has more to do with Fallon’s call for Breyer to step down than any real strategy to replace older Democrat-appointed justices with newer models. In fact, as my friend Ed Morrissey points out at Hot Air, if Breyer were to step down his replacement would likely have to be at least slightly more centrist than Breyer in order to be confirmed.

Do progressives think that Biden can get another Sonia Sotomayor past the goalie in a 50/50 Senate, especially with Senate Republicans still angry over the treatment given to Brett Kavanaugh and to a lesser extent Amy Coney Barrett? Maaaybe, but I doubt Biden would be convinced of that. He’d be more likely to appoint a more center-liberal jurist, especially in the first slot that opens up after his unity talk.

Ed adds that perhaps progressives should just leave well enough alone. If this were truly about the Supreme Court, I’d agree, but I suspect Fallon’s push is based on virtue signaling and fundraising more than anything else. Besides, replacing one lefty justice with one that’s slightly more centrist could end up being good news for gun owners and Second Amendment supporters, though I’ll admit that’s a slim possibility with Biden in charge of the appointment.

With the Lefty already eyeing the Supreme Court, however, I’m keeping my fingers crossed that at least four of the current justices vote to accept one of the many Second Amendment cases that SCOTUS will be asked to hear in the coming months. Hopefully we can get some good case law buttressing our right to keep and bear arms before Democrats turn their attention to the Court in earnest.

[Smoken D]

Don't count out the new regime to impeach Trump under article 25 and make all his supreme court appointments revocable so they can put their people in. Why not, they plan on taking our guns away and revoke the 2nd.

[Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438]

27 minutes ago, Smoken D said:

Don't count out the new regime to impeach Trump under article 25 and make all his supreme court appointments revocable so they can put their people in. Why not, they plan on taking our guns away and revoke the 2nd.

 

Uh, I don't think so.  There is nothing in the Constitution that gives the Congress (or anyone) the power to do this. 

 

LL

[Smoken D]

3 hours ago, Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 said:

 

Uh, I don't think so.  There is nothing in the Constitution that gives the Congress (or anyone) the power to do this. 

 

LL

 

Totally agree, but who says Biden and gang have any desire to follow the constitution. That's my worry.

[Rye Miles #13621]

On 1/8/2021 at 10:33 AM, Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 said:

 

Uh, I don't think so.  There is nothing in the Constitution that gives the Congress (or anyone) the power to do this. 

 

LL

+ 100000

[Blackwater 53393]

There’s a solution that is being overlooked here!!

 

When any such attempts are made, a sufficient number of senators or representatives should immediately abandon the chamber, preventing a quorum from being present!!

[bgavin]

Congress has the authority to change the size of the court, and to impeach its members.
IIRC, more impeachments have been brought against justices than against presidents.

IMO, the Democrat trifecta will either stack the SCOTUS or impeach Gorsuch, Kavanugh and Barrett.
The Democrat Senate will rubber stamp the convictions or stacking.

Next, the Democrat trifecta will introduce a slew of gun laws and gun taxes.
Biden will sign them.

Then the fun begins.

[Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438]

1 hour ago, bgavin said:

Congress has the authority to change the size of the court, and to impeach its members.
IIRC, more impeachments have been brought against justices than against presidents.

IMO, the Democrat trifecta will either stack the SCOTUS or impeach Gorsuch, Kavanugh and Barrett.
The Democrat Senate will rubber stamp the convictions or stacking.

Next, the Democrat trifecta will introduce a slew of gun laws and gun taxes.
Biden will sign them.

Then the fun begins.

 

Just a couple of observations:

• There has been only one SCt Justice impeachment in history - Samuel Chase - and that impeachment was NOT followed by conviction in the Senate;
• Such a conviction would require a 2/3 majority vote; even with a slim majority in the Senate, the Democrats would need to persuade 15 or so Republicans to vote with them - most of whom already voted to confirm the three referenced Justices; very unlikely.  
• This is not the impeachment of Trump - a widely disrespected and unpopular President who has been regularly trashed in the press.  Without a huge public uproar, and more convinving evidence of actual bad behavior by the Justice, such a result is, again, highly unlikely.
• Stacking (or more properly packing) has been bandied about, but is in my view, also unlikely.  The pendulum swings rapidly these days, and if the Ds were to expand the membership of the Court in order to pack it and acheive a favorable majority (no sure thing with no guarantee of deaths/resignations), it is clear that the same might occur in reverse with the next R administration; packing is easily recognized as an illegitimate political maneuver, and those who cause it to occur may be rewarded with public scorn and voter rejection in the next election cycle.

[bgavin]

Please read more carefully:  "more impeachments have been brought against justices than against presidents."
I did not specify "supreme court justices".. only justices, which is factual.
Nor did I mention "convictions" which is not the same as bringing articles of impeachment.

I meant what I said, not what you read into it.

Trump is not "a widely disrespected and unpopular President" for the 75 million Americans who voted for him.
The press was trashing Trump even before he was nominated, let alone elected.  This has been steady over 4 years.

Your press turns a blind eye to the invocations of violence from Democrats (I can provide quotes).
They also turn a blind eye to three Democrat challenges to the Electoral College vote in the last 20 years.
Your press turns a blind eye to the Democrat protesters who also stormed the congress, occupied Wall Street and commandeered Seattle.

If you missed it, there already is a huge public uproar going on, just not the one you support.

Stacking is a colloquialism, and one that is understood in the context delivered:  a crooked means of "stacking the deck."
FDR attempted to stack the SCOTUS and was shot down by the Republican congress.
I do not anticipate a Republican majority in Congress at any time in the foreseeable future, so that safeguard against stacking is not available.

75 million people view this mess as illegitimate political maneuvering and are expressing their scorn.
In response, we have Communist/Nazi censorship, banning, employment intimidation, no-fly list additions, calls for "re-education camps" and the unequal application of justice between the DC people and the ANTIFA/BLM riots, lootings and burnings.
 

[John Kloehr]

On 1/8/2021 at 10:02 AM, Smoken D said:

Don't count out the new regime to impeach Trump under article 25 and make all his supreme court appointments revocable so they can put their people in. Why not, they plan on taking our guns away and revoke the 2nd.

No, the nominations were confirmed. This theory would require something similar to the 25th apply to all who voted to confirm the nominations.

 

As to what I did not bold... Should the progressives push this, I hope the SCOTUS draws an even clearer line that the 2nd is not revocable, SCOTUS issues a ruling which clearly states the right is inherent in the people. A ruling which clearly states the government is restricted and clearly states no shenanigans can remove the restriction of an inherent right, including revocation of any text to that effect.

[Smoken D]

1 hour ago, John Kloehr said:

No, the nominations were confirmed. This theory would require something similar to the 25th apply to all who voted to confirm the nominations.

 

As to what I did not bold... Should the progressives push this, I hope the SCOTUS draws an even clearer line that the 2nd is not revocable, SCOTUS issues a ruling which clearly states the right is inherent in the people. A ruling which clearly states the government is restricted and clearly states no shenanigans can remove the restriction of an inherent right, including revocation of any text to that effect.

 

 

Totally agree, as I stated before on this subject.

 

On 1/8/2021 at 1:16 PM, Smoken D said:

 

Totally agree, but who says Biden and gang have any desire to follow the constitution. That's my worry.