As the Supreme Court continues delivering rulings on hotly contested issues, the left’s movement to transform the Judicial Branch has taken shape.

And it is gaining momentum. (Politico)

A group of progressive organizations is for the first time supporting the proposal to add justices to the court in hopes of weakening the conservative majority, according to a memo provided to POLITICO. The move comes weeks before the Supreme Court is expected to hand down opinions on several hotly contested issues, including President Donald Trump’s tax returns, abortion rights and the fate of “Dreamers.”

The Progressive Change Institute, Be a Hero, Friends of the Earth, Presente and 350 are among those groups that are newly joining the call, according to organizers. Take Back the Court, Demand Justice and the Sunrise Movement, which previously backed the idea, also signed onto the open letter.

“Trump and the Republicans in Congress have used aggressive tactics, including eliminating the filibuster, to pack the courts with conservative ideologues and prevent the will of the people from being heard,” said Erich Pica, president of the environmental group Friends of the Earth. “From the fight for racial justice to efforts to stop climate change and protect our clean air and water, the current configuration of the court has consistently stood in the way of progress. We simply do not have a generation’s worth of time to replace judges.”

The once-fringe idea of packing the court got a major boost during the Democratic presidential primary, when several candidates said they were open to the plan or supported it. Democrats have argued the hardball tactic is needed after Republicans blocked former President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland and others on the lower courts.

READ NEXT: Watch out for These Five Coming Supreme Court Rulings >>

Support the Landmark Lawsuit Against Antifa


      1. john Roberts thinks that as a Catholic, he will be prayed out of pergatory for his vast sins. Not so. “Do not be deceived. God is not mocked….”
        So what happened to him? The elite ONE WORLD ORDER, aka Bilderbergs either blackmailed him or bought him out. He believes he has a way AROUND being judged for his evil actions.
        God please do not let him escape.

    1. No need to move the court further left. We already have traitors to America with John Roberts and Gorsuch coming up with irrational ideas as to why our EXISTING president can’t void and abolish a PREVIOUS president’s EO. The idea that “he did not do it right”. is bogus.
      Now is the time to pray that God will move against these two traitors. For sure, they are more evil than Kagan, Sotomeyer, Gingsberg and Beyers.

    2. I am making a suitable salary from home $8k-$10k/week , which is great, underneath a 12 months ago I was jobless in a terrible economy. I thank God each day I turned into blessed with these -instructions and now it is my obligation to pay it forward and proportion it with anybody………………..Join Here      

    3. I am making a suitable salary from home $8k-$10k/week , which is great, underneath a 12 months ago I was jobless in a terrible economy. I thank God each day I turned into blessed with these -instructions and now it is my obligation to pay it forward and proportion it with anybody………………..Join Here 

  1. Why this effort? With Roberts, and sometimes Gorsuch, it is already a liberal Court, just as it has been for decades–since Roe v Wade.

    1. The timing of this article is strange, talking about the Right Wing packing the court a couple of days after DACA was allowed to continue….

    2. it will never happen as congress nor the senate can change the takes the convention of states to do that so you will need 34 states to ratify it! that won’t happen!

      1. Not true. The Constitution does not designate the number of justices on the supreme court. There have been different numbers in the past. Rosevelt (Franklin) tried to do this and failed because at that time our politicians still had some sense of tradition and honer, something that no longer exists, particularly on the left. The Democrats are now a “by any means” party. The idea of packing the supreme court (and lower courts for that matter) is a real threat that must be taken seriously and does not require a change to the Constitution, only a Democrat majority Senate and a Democrat President (House? I’m uncertain about that) are needed along with a little “by any means” politics.

  2. With Justice Roberts in there, who would be deluded enough to think that libtards need any more of a majority ?

  3. Most Americans didn’t know when President Franklin Roosevelt was denied, he considered “packing” the Supreme Court. In fact most Americans didn’t know the number of Supreme Court Justices could be adjusted.

    But if it’s as easy as the socialist movement believes it is, perhaps it’s time to carve “nine” into Article I, Section 8; Article II, Section 2; and Article III, Section 1 and 2. One can only imagine the founders envisioned a growing nation and a growing need for Supreme Court decision.

    As usual, it has become a can of worms that may be exploited for corrupt purposes. If the number is to be 11 or 15, let it become law after the next three or four administrations. Leaving it adjustable at any time leaves it open to ideological whim. My preference would be to carve it in stone as it is.

    1. Yet another item for consideration at a Convention of States.
      The increasingly Insane Demoncrats are making it ever more necessary for things that have been accepted as “understood” by all parties involved in the activities of government to be “carved in stone”.

  4. Thu 21 Nov 2013 12.25 EST The US Senate voted on Thursday to change the rules that have enabled Republicans to block Barack Obama’s nominees for top administration posts. -The Gaurdian

    Funny how the Democrats/progressives are once again trying to change the facts to suit their narrative. Chucky was warned “The Nuclear Option” was going to bite him in the posterior.

  5. Maybe it is time for term limits for Supreme court judges. There should be a age limit for retirement Say 70 Yrs

    1. I disagree with the 70 age.

      I’m 73 and still know the Constitution better than 5 of the nine just-us’s

    2. POTUS Trump is 73.
      There is no reason given the current average lifespan why a SCJ should be forced to retire before age 75, unless it can be demonstrated that there is some measurable deterioration in mental faculties and function.
      I’m all in favor of Term Limits for SCJ, as I am for Members of Congress.

    3. No it is time that the American people put representatives in Congress who will IMPEACH such evil, anti-Constitutional judges from office. That is grounds in itself. When Ginsberg declared that she was NOT going to use just the Constitution to make rulings, she left the realm where she was a patriot. This is who she is!!!!! She is a puppet of the ONE WORLD ORDER.

    4. Yes I agree with you.
      No justices should retire at will or die in the panel!. &0 years age limit and/or 12 years from appoitment but nore than 16 years. And no justice should be appointed after 65.

  6. The counter tactic which should be used by the Republicans is to stack the court NOW while the
    Senate is still controlled by sane people.

  7. I think the Jacobins have a very short memory, but that’s what happens when you think history started yesterday. I must remind those leftists it was Harry Reid, the Democrat Senate Majority Leader, who eliminated the filibuster with regard to presidential appointees.

    Does that refresh your recollection looney left?

  8. The liberal members of the Supreme Court want a Global Government. The want the United States to disappear so that they can be Supreme Court Justices OF THE WORLD. Never ever make a egotistical wish like that because it has happened in sickness coming from sick people over and over again in the history of the human race. The last four: ******, Soviet Union, Radical Islam, Communist Chinese and now GLOBALISM. One thing we know is that any country that tried to form an empire ended in massive blood and death. If that is what these Justices want then they must resign.

    1. Roberts is being blackmailed by democommunists because of his “questionable” adoption of Irish children years ago. FRAUD hussein obunghole “used” that and that my friends is how we got obunghole care shoved down our throats.

  9. The court needs to refrain from social justice, racial justice, gender justice. They need to concentrate on JUSTICE. Justice under the Constitution of the United States.

  10. On November 21, 2013, Senate Democrats used the so-called “nuclear option,” voting 52–48 — with all Republicans and three Democrats opposed — to eliminate the use of the filibuster on executive branch nominees and judicial nominees, except to the Supreme Court.

  11. Well, two of the sitting Supreme Court justices are in their 80’s, two more are in their 70’s, so the winner of the presidential election in November could name two or possibly three new justices before the next election (2024). It’s kind of apparent that the liberals have the majority now in the Supreme Court with the recent actions of john RINO roberts in voting AGAINST a conservative president on the DACA disgrace (it was UNCONSTITUTIONAL to start with, that’s why soetoro did it with an E.O.; Trump was trying to RIGHT a WRONG). If Trump holds on to the presidency, he could make it a CONSERVATIVE COURT for quite some time to come, in my opinion. This will be the most important election of our lifetime in so many ways, so get out and vote like your life depends on it……. it just might!

  12. Whatever it takes, get it in the code…9 (nine) justices on the supreme court, lock it in place, etch it in stone!

  13. A fringe idea that will become reality if we, the voters, do not take the necessary steps to prevent it.

  14. “Trump and the Republicans in Congress have used aggressive tactics, including eliminating the filibuster” Liar, Liar pants on fire. The filibuster was killed by Democrat Harry Reid. Don’t believe anything else the Democrats say in the article.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *