• Hannah Nelson

Court-Packing

The Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937, also known as court-packing, was first introduced by Franklin D. Roosevelt. His plan? Appoint six additional justices to the Supreme Court for each sitting justice that was older than 70 years and six months and served for 10 years or more.


But why?


Since his New Deal legislation was not being passed, FDR saw it fit to "pack" the court in his favor to get the outcome he desired.


Fast forward 83 years, and here we are with the same debate.


In light of Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s passing, the Left wants to pack the courts to counteract President Trump’s nomination, and now confirmation, of Justice Amy Coney Barrett.


So much for tolerance and inclusion from the Left.


Nonetheless, packing the courts seems like the most viable option for the Left to ensure their political victory over their enemy, President Trump.


There’s just one slight problem.


The Left cannot even agree on what "court-packing' is.


By definition, court-packing is the process of adding additional seats to the Supreme Court. Simple enough, right?


The Left, as usual, has misrepresented the definition of court-packing to paint Trump as the destroyer of democracy. His nomination of Amy Coney Barrett has even been referred to as court-packing by the Biden campaign, news outlets, and uneducated voters alike.


Let me be clear: a conservative majority does not constitute court-packing.


Definitions aside, the real question is would a Biden Administration pack the courts?


In 2019, the answer was no.


Last year, Biden commented that court-packing would equate to "political football," and that it would "come back to bite us." In October of 2019, Biden gave a definite answer claiming that "I would not get into court-packing. We add three justices. Next time around, we lose control, they add three justices. We begin to lose any credibility the court has at all."


But that can’t be right! After all, Biden refused to comment on the issue for months, saying it all depends on the outcome of the election and Coney Barrett’s appointment.


So much for avoiding political football, huh?


Politics has become a vicious game for the Left. The goal? Destroying the enemy and undermining their platform in any and every way possible. The Left has become short-sighted. Instead of seeing long-term plans and solutions, they can only see their present desire to dismantle the President.


The Left should take these matters more seriously.


The Supreme Court is filled with nine intelligent and educated individuals who can serve for life, and in that time, shape our nation with the policies they pass. These justices will serve long past Trump’s time as President, making it vital to be forward-thinking on this issue.


These justices have sworn to uphold the values of the Constitution, a non-partisan document. As much as the Left would want you to believe that the higher court has a secret plan to dismantle and strip away minority rights, this is simply not the case. Justice Coney Barrett, and her colleagues, swore to uphold the Constitution regardless of their personal values.


Even Biden has admitted that any extension or packing of the Supreme Court will not only be ineffective, but it will inherently destroy the legitimacy of the highest court in our nation.


270 views

 The #WalkAway Campaign © 2020 | THE PEOPLE.  THE POWER.  THE HASHTAG. 1872 Lexington Ave., Suite 242, New York, NY 10035 | info@walkawaycampaign.com