Democrats renew push to expand Supreme Court

[TJ8869]

Why is it idiotic?

Because it’s almost completely false.

 

[TJ8869]

The number of Supreme Court justices is set by Congress.
In 1837, the states were divided into 9 federal judicial districts.
In 1869, the number of Supreme Court justices was 9 and it has remained that way since.

Today, there are 13 federal judicial districts, instead of 9.

Setting aside the idea that the Supreme Court should be advancing a particular political party's interests, there's a compelling argument in favor of having the number of justices on the Supreme Court match the number of federal judicial districts.

The practice of adding a Supreme Court justice each time a new circuit court was established was used in the 19th century, when we had no separate federal appellate court system and Supreme Court justices were also assigned to serve on a circuit court in addition to their SCOTUS responsibilities.

Those circuit courts were abolished by the Judicial Code of 1911 and their jurisdiction was transferred to the US District Courts. There are 94 US District Courts today. Should we have 94 Supreme Court justices to mirror that number?

The 13 court districts to which you’re referring are the 13 circuit courts of appeals, which were established primarily for the purpose of easing the Supreme Court’s caseload by the Evarts Act of 1891. These court districts that you claim should match the number of Supreme Court justices didn’t even exist yet when the current number of 9 was settled upon in 1869.

 

[joelbc1]

Like petulant children that don't get their way.

Two can play this game, Northern….McConnell and Grassley changed the rules a few years ago….forever.

 

[BioHawk]

It’s a reason that at least makes sense. You’re pissed about Garland and ACB. I get it. It was a shitty, hypocritical thing that the Republicans did. So just say you want a measure of retribution.

If Dems have the power to increase the size of the Court then increase the size of the Court. But cloaking your argument in some nonsensical lie about how it’s an historical imperative based on the number of appellate courts is just idiotic.

It makes more sense than "F**k you and your kids, my team has to win!"

 

[B1GDeal]

The practice of adding a Supreme Court justice each time a new circuit court was established was used in the 19th century, when we had no separate federal appellate court system and Supreme Court justices were also assigned to serve on a circuit court in addition to their SCOTUS responsibilities.

Those circuit courts were abolished by the Judicial Code of 1911 and their jurisdiction was transferred to the US District Courts. There are 94 US District Courts today. Should we have 94 Supreme Court justices to mirror that number?

The 13 court districts to which you’re referring are the 13 circuit courts of appeals, which were established primarily for the purpose of easing the Supreme Court’s caseload by the Evarts Act of 1891. These court districts that you claim should match the number of Supreme Court justices didn’t even exist yet when the current number of 9 was settled upon in 1869.

Maybe we should and a panel of whatever number 9, 13, 21, etc., would be randomly assigned to a case.