Ladies and gentlemen: this is your modern DSA, the vanguard of our changing politics. Laugh them off if you please — there is plenty to laugh at, but do not doubt their sincerity. There are few dangers greater in politics than sincere fools.
Jeffrey Blehar (The National Review)
Nothing is off-limits to Democrats. They spread “fake news” to neuter Trump’s presidency, then censored “real news” to ensure Biden’s presidency. They inflated mail-in ballots to elect Biden in 2020, then accepted no ballots to nominate Kamala Harris in 2024. So, what was once a suspicion is now obvious: they will pack the Supreme Court unless a Republican occupies the Oval Office.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries just reminded us that every vote for a Democrat in the House and Senate helps lay the groundwork for the institution’s eventual subordination, should Democrats ever regain control of the presidency and both chambers of Congress. Speaking at the National Association of Black Journalists convention in Atlanta, Jeffries characterized the Supreme Court as a “subsidiary” of President Donald Trump’s MAGA movement and promised “dramatic Supreme Court reform” if Democrats take power.
Jeffries didn’t detail what “reform” he had in mind, but the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) did: legislation to expand the Court to 13 justices, just enough to hand a future Democrat president a built-in majority. Similar legislation has been endorsed by Sens. Ed Markey (D-MA), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Tina Smith (D-MN), and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has also endorsed expanding the Court, though he hasn’t committed to a specific number.
More tellingly, both the Democratic Party’s most recent presidential nominee, Kamala Harris, and one of its most prominent rising stars, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), have explicitly endorsed expanding to 13 justices. The Democratic Socialists of America, of which Ocasio-Cortez is a member, goes further still: its current national program calls for replacing the Supreme Court entirely with a judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress.
Democrat complaints that the Supreme Court has become a “subsidiary” of Trump’s MAGA movement are false — a shabby pretext for making it a subsidiary of the Democratic Party instead — and their court-packing “solution” is a threat to our constitutional order.
While President Trump secured notable legal rulings during his second term—such as curbing district judges’ use of nationwide injunctions, strengthening executive authority over independent agencies, and advancing key immigration and administrative policies—the Court has also handed him major defeats. It struck down his broad use of emergency powers for global tariffs, rejected efforts to restrict birthright citizenship, and blocked his attempt to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. A judicial body willing to invalidate signature presidential policies cannot credibly be called a partisan puppet.
Whatever Democrats think of the Court’s conservative majority, a judicial body willing to invalidate some of Trump’s signature policies can hardly be described seriously as a “subsidiary” of the MAGA movement. That judicial independence is precisely what court-packing puts at risk, which is why a Democrat-controlled Congress rejected FDR’s court-packing scheme in 1937 (a historic precedent today’s party seems eager to forget). The number of justices has remained fixed at nine since 1869; altering it now serves purely political ends.
The Supreme Court can restrain presidents only if its composition isn’t adjusted whenever the party in power dislikes its rulings. If Democrats add four seats to manufacture an immediate ideological majority, Republicans will have every incentive to add more seats the next time they control Washington — and nothing would stop the cycle from repeating indefinitely. That isn’t reform. It’s the destruction of the very system of checks and balances the Court exists to preserve.
Historically, a change this radical would require 60 votes to overcome a Senate filibuster — but Democrats are laying the groundwork to eliminate that institution too. The last time two senators defied the party’s most radical elements and voted with Republicans to preserve the filibuster, they were run out of the party. The fate of Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) will make it that much harder for any Democrat to put country over party the next time Democrats control the Senate.
In the last hundred years, two presidents rank highest in Supreme Court appointments: Franklin Roosevelt with nine, and Dwight Eisenhower with five. In the modern era — since John F. Kennedy’s election — only two presidents have appointed more than three justices: Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, with four apiece. But what today’s Democrats should pay closer attention to is those same presidents’ re-election numbers:
- Roosevelt (1936) won 60.8% of the popular vote and 46 states
- Eisenhower (1956) won 57.4% of the popular vote and 41 states
- Nixon (1972) won 60.7% of the popular vote and 49 states
- Reagan (1984) won 58.8% of the popular vote and 49 states
Nothing represents the will of the people more than an incumbent’s re-election bid — a referendum on his presidency — and nothing represents a mandate more than a landslide. Which is why conservatives whining about “Roosevelt packing the Court” need to pipe down: the electorate knew exactly what FDR was about and re-elected him anyway, by a wider margin than almost anyone in American history. Bottom line: popular presidents ARE the people’s representative.
The Democrat Party has repeatedly shown itself unable to persuade we the people to support ideas that begin on their far-left flank (e.g. Harris’s support for federally funding inmate gender re-assignment surgeries cost her dearly in 2024). Court packing is well along that path. If Democrats regain unified control of Washington, voters should expect the dismantling of an independent Supreme Court to sit near the top of the agenda.
What today’s Democrats are really saying is that, after losing every branch of government in 2024, they resent the will of the people. That, and their socialist wing’s endgame; communist-style, one-party control over the entire nation, achieved by (1) abolishing the Electoral College, (2) creating a presidency subordinate to Congress, (3) creating a judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress, (4) granting statehood to D.C. and Puerto Rico, and (5) granting those claiming “permanent U.S. residence” the right to vote.
Taken together, these five goals do not represent a plan to repair American democracy. They represent a blueprint to disassemble it. By systematically dismantling the separation of powers, stripping the judiciary of its independence, and centralizing authority within a single legislative chamber, this platform seeks to replace our constitutional republic with an unchecked partisan system.
Court-packing is simply the wedge intended to breach the legal wall first. If voters choose to ignore these warnings and hand unified control back to Democrats, they should not be surprised when the delicate balance of checks and balances gives way to a permanent uni-party wielding unchecked power.