its not unconstitutional though, right? like holding up a supreme court justice nomination for 15 months.
I think packing is the wrong term for what Biden MIGHT do. It's expanding. Packing is increasing the density of one bias (over the others) in the same space, like what McConnell is doing. Going above 9 is not to gain a majority, there is already a majority, and if public opinion polls are to be believed it is a non-representative majority. As for my Bible thumpers part, I was referring to all the courts, not just scotus.
You mean the "80-year-old frail man" who jogs and rides a bike, meanwhile Trump needs help going down a lightly-sloping ramp and needs both hands to drink from a small bottle of water? You mean that guy?
The poor dear. On the plus side, he's following in his old man's footsteps on his way to permanent victimhood.
Yet... the concept keeps coming up again. "The central provision of the bill would have granted the president power to appoint an additional justice to the U.S. Supreme Court, up to a maximum of six, for every member of the court over the age of 70 years and 6 months." How many Supreme Court Justices are currently over the age of 70 year and 6 months? This conceptual proposal which was driven in the most detail by FDR -- keeps coming up over and over. What is the modern criteria that would be proposed for allowing additional justices to be added to the court - I doubt whether any proposal from Democrats in 2021 would be based on "we felt like it".
I agree it is what Biden might do, but I don't understand why he can't clarify his position. This is one of the biggest things holding me up from crossing the aisle. We can argue semantics, but the term being used is "packing the courts".
Biden is not wrong in his assessment of the courts and the packing the republicans have engaged in. The scam the republicans have run through the senate is probably the truest threat to the unity of the nation going forward.