During a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee held in recent days, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) pushed the proposal of expanding the size of the U.S. Supreme Court, citing the political machinations that led to its current roster of Justices.
On the court now, which overall has just nine members, are three picks from Donald Trump — one of whom was confirmed for a seat Mitch McConnell refused to entertain filling despite a pick from then-President Obama and another of whom he and Republicans rushed to confirm despite Election Day in 2020 looming just weeks away. An argument could probably be made, if we’re going to be concerned about the proximity of elections, for having confirmed the Obama pick before the 2016 elections and waiting on the Trump nominee, Amy Coney Barrett, in 2020 — but Senate Republicans obviously didn’t do such a thing. In the hearing, Schiff pointed out how the court’s subsequent decision to undo the protections for abortion enshrined in the decades-old ruling from Roe v. Wade is having real-world health impacts on people around the country, many of whom now need to travel to another state — a difficult undertaking — if they need an abortion.
Schiff also said he wouldn’t have imagined himself supporting expanding the court before these developments played out, but the situation became urgent. It’s not just the court’s decision on abortion. What other established rights could be threatened?
“Reversing 50 years of precedent. Removing the right to bodily autonomy. Threatening the right to privacy,” a caption alongside some of Schiff’s remarks said on his official Twitter account. “How did we get here? Republicans packed the Supreme Court, and reactionary Justices pushed political rulings. This cannot continue. We need to expand the court. Now.” There are already proposals to add members to the court, although these ideas haven’t made substantial inroads in terms of seeing the needed levels of support — yet. Even in just basic terms, the size of the Supreme Court has been expanded at other points in history.
In his remarks, Schiff also expressed support for establishing term limits for members of the court and implementing a code of ethics, which in the imaginings of those pushing it would no doubt be binding and come with enforcement mechanisms.
The Supreme Court was also the subject of other recent proceedings in Congress, as GOP Senators tried to characterize Attorney General Merrick Garland as essentially just leaving members of the court and their families to the mercies of pro-abortion protesters after a draft of the decision overturning Roe leaked, but that’s just not true. He tried to explain to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) how U.S. Marshals on the scene of Justices’ residences — who he tasked to carry out 24/7 protection — had a role in deciding whether to arrest any protesters, but Cruz tried to allege some kind of political motivation behind decisions of whether to prosecute anyway, ignoring how there was much more to the process.
Reversing 50 years of precedent. Removing the right to bodily autonomy. Threatening the right to privacy.
How did we get here?
Republicans packed the Supreme Court, and reactionary Justices pushed political rulings.
This cannot continue. We need to expand the court. Now. pic.twitter.com/Wl9MHgZ5th
— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) March 1, 2023
