Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MarineCombatEngineer

(18,263 posts)
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 10:58 AM 3 hrs ago

I used to be against expanding the Supreme Court, but ever since Trumpedo took over, and given

the blatantly unamerican decisions by this rogue court, I'm now in favor of expanding it when we take over the House, Senate and Executive branches of the govt. to right this sinking ship.

What say you?

50 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I used to be against expanding the Supreme Court, but ever since Trumpedo took over, and given (Original Post) MarineCombatEngineer 3 hrs ago OP
Fight fire with fire EnergizedLib 3 hrs ago #1
Agreed. nt MarineCombatEngineer 3 hrs ago #2
Six Aviation Pro 3 hrs ago #3
First order of homegirl 22 min ago #40
Expand to 13 to match appeals courts -- every judge assigned 1 court of appeals JT45242 3 hrs ago #4
Congress can reform XCOTUS ethics right after they heal themselves Soul_of_Wit 21 min ago #41
Agreed -- we need ethics laws with teeth for all branches of government JT45242 18 min ago #42
Just the threat of a serious attempt to expand the court tempered the fascists blocking FDR's programs ImNotGod 3 hrs ago #5
I felt the same way. We need four more justices. OLDMDDEM 3 hrs ago #6
When SCROTUS says the sky is green for the 500th time it's already an existential necessity Ponietz 3 hrs ago #7
SCROTUS Six Corrupt Ratbastards Of The United States n/t lavoosh99 49 min ago #27
Absolutely Scubamatt 3 hrs ago #8
Followed by a shit load of other recent unamerican decisions by these 6 traitors to the US Constitution. nt MarineCombatEngineer 2 hrs ago #11
There can be no restoration of lost rights or repair of the damage of the Trump era without court expansion Fiendish Thingy 2 hrs ago #9
Agreed. nt MarineCombatEngineer 2 hrs ago #12
I'm okay with it as long as it doesn't invite the GOP to do the same. Wednesdays 2 hrs ago #10
No constitutional amendment is required to expand the USSC. The number of judges is set by Congress. nt in2herbs 46 min ago #28
That's the problem. Wednesdays 28 min ago #39
The Constitution gives Congress the power to set the number of SCOTUS members. lastlib 16 min ago #45
Yes, they are very good at "getting creative." nt Wednesdays 2 min ago #50
What you are saying is that XCOTUS can ignore the constitution, again Soul_of_Wit 12 min ago #48
Like you, I wouldn't say this lightly, but it must be done. n/t Mister Ed 2 hrs ago #13
Expand to 13, Ferryboat 2 hrs ago #14
I am in favor of expanding the number of SCOTUS members LetMyPeopleVote 2 hrs ago #15
I'm in favor of aligning with the number of circuit courts. That would take us to 13. Pacifist Patriot 1 hr ago #16
Exactly! On both counts. Karma13612 1 hr ago #18
Mitch may be too far gone to remember what he did Soul_of_Wit 5 min ago #49
Absolutely support expanding it. Karma13612 1 hr ago #17
Many countries have a lot more judges Farmer-Rick 1 hr ago #19
In principle no; in response to the current fascist SC majority, we gotta do it. NBachers 1 hr ago #20
Say there old jarhead - - - AverageOldGuy 1 hr ago #21
Not married yet, happening on July 4th but enjoying the bliss of my upcoming union MarineCombatEngineer 1 hr ago #23
I am very happy for you MCE, you are a good man. HappyH 13 min ago #47
13, one for each Circuit duckworth969 1 hr ago #22
They need to rotate the leadership yes, plus it's not an appointment for life FakeNoose 52 min ago #24
I'm with you. spanone 51 min ago #25
I am for it. Dawson Leery 50 min ago #26
First... GiqueCee 45 min ago #29
Shhh! Don't talk about this until there is a Dem prez and a Dem senate. JustABozoOnThisBus 44 min ago #30
I guess. maxsolomon 40 min ago #31
If the situation were reversed, they would do it in a minute. Katinfl 40 min ago #32
I have also come around to the idea. TomSlick 35 min ago #33
If Democrats get enough of a majority and do this, will they shoot themselves in the foot with appeasement ? LiberalLovinLug 35 min ago #34
Yes and term limits Figarosmom 34 min ago #35
Absolutely. xuplate 33 min ago #36
I'm for going back over every decision this court has made, mwmisses4289 33 min ago #37
eXpand the XCOTUS Soul_of_Wit 30 min ago #38
Past time to kick Alito and ass-licking Thomas oasis 17 min ago #43
Yes, expand to 13 when the next democrat is in the White House. HappyH 16 min ago #44
Still against. Whatever we do works for them, too, in another situation. So far SCOTUS rules against him 80% ... marble falls 16 min ago #46

Aviation Pro

(15,885 posts)
3. Six
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 11:02 AM
3 hrs ago

One to torment and abuse each one of those six vile motherfuckers.

We need stone cold pipehitters.

JT45242

(4,235 posts)
4. Expand to 13 to match appeals courts -- every judge assigned 1 court of appeals
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 11:11 AM
3 hrs ago

It would make sense.

I also want real judicial reform especially ethics with bite for penalty.

Soul_of_Wit

(204 posts)
41. Congress can reform XCOTUS ethics right after they heal themselves
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 01:57 PM
21 min ago

Congress needs ethical reform so that they have the moral authority to provide checks and balances. Insider trading is currently legal for folks with a lot of inside information.

JT45242

(4,235 posts)
42. Agreed -- we need ethics laws with teeth for all branches of government
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 02:00 PM
18 min ago

I was sticking to the judiciary because of the OP.

Insider trading, emoluments, lobbyist revolving door, citizens united and legal bribes or "tips"

lots of ethics laws need to be written and enforced.

ImNotGod

(1,324 posts)
5. Just the threat of a serious attempt to expand the court tempered the fascists blocking FDR's programs
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 11:12 AM
3 hrs ago

"reined them in" so to speak. It might work again just by attempting it as it scares the hell out of the fascist court majority, losing power is their worst fear.

Ponietz

(4,597 posts)
7. When SCROTUS says the sky is green for the 500th time it's already an existential necessity
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 11:14 AM
3 hrs ago

The dissonance between their sophistry and the plain meaning of words is untenable. We should certainly try to fix it before the entire thing collapses in on itself.

MarineCombatEngineer

(18,263 posts)
11. Followed by a shit load of other recent unamerican decisions by these 6 traitors to the US Constitution. nt
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 11:20 AM
2 hrs ago

Fiendish Thingy

(24,448 posts)
9. There can be no restoration of lost rights or repair of the damage of the Trump era without court expansion
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 11:19 AM
2 hrs ago

And killing the filibuster to do so.

Whatever else is on anyone’s wish list for the future when Dems have the trifecta again, none of it is possible without expanding the court first.

Court expansion must be the one and only litmus/purity test for Dem candidates.

We must only elect Dems, especially Dem senators, who have the courage to kill the filibuster to pass court expansion.

Wednesdays

(23,451 posts)
10. I'm okay with it as long as it doesn't invite the GOP to do the same.
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 11:19 AM
2 hrs ago

And what are you willing to bet that the current SCOTUS would strike down any court expansion, given that it can't come from a Constitutional Amendment?

in2herbs

(4,660 posts)
28. No constitutional amendment is required to expand the USSC. The number of judges is set by Congress. nt
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 01:32 PM
46 min ago

Wednesdays

(23,451 posts)
39. That's the problem.
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 01:50 PM
28 min ago

The Court can't strike down a Constitutional Amendment, but they can strike down an act of Congress.

lastlib

(28,824 posts)
45. The Constitution gives Congress the power to set the number of SCOTUS members.
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 02:02 PM
16 min ago

And also to set its jurisdiction, except for certain constitutional original jurisdiction. Simple soluton is to remove its jurisdiction over any case involving the number of members. It's superfluous, but WTH? CYA, JIC they try to get creative.

Soul_of_Wit

(204 posts)
48. What you are saying is that XCOTUS can ignore the constitution, again
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 02:06 PM
12 min ago

Ideally, Congress would pass the Recusal Act first. Clearly, the Extreme Court shouldn't be able to rule to retain its own size.

Ferryboat

(1,285 posts)
14. Expand to 13,
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 11:45 AM
2 hrs ago

Allow EVERY President 1 pick and rotate out senior member until current group is replaced. This will stop the dog a pony show of hearings in congress.
Set a term limit.
Needless to say details need to be worked out.

Pacifist Patriot

(25,222 posts)
16. I'm in favor of aligning with the number of circuit courts. That would take us to 13.
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 12:54 PM
1 hr ago

It's a reasonable basis for doing so. But I certainly wouldn't want it done quite yet!

Karma13612

(5,049 posts)
18. Exactly! On both counts.
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 12:59 PM
1 hr ago

Needs to be done once we have a Democratic president again. Dems deserve a fair shake considering that SOB got 3 slots to fill, and Mitch (is he still in the hospital??) denied Obama his picks.


Soul_of_Wit

(204 posts)
49. Mitch may be too far gone to remember what he did
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 02:13 PM
5 min ago

...but we remember what he did. I still think Obama's worst moment was not creating a constitutional crisis by naming a SCOTUS pick anyway. No advice and consent equal no say in the matter. Force the then Supreme Court to rule on what Mitch did.

Karma13612

(5,049 posts)
17. Absolutely support expanding it.
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 12:57 PM
1 hr ago

I was for it, even before the more odious rulings in the last couple years.
We need to have at least one Justice for each of the Federal ?Circuit?District? Courts, for work load alone. Our justice system is overburdened and understaffed.

Delays from weeks to months to years is just not acceptable. As the old saying goes, justice delayed is justice denied.



Farmer-Rick

(12,852 posts)
19. Many countries have a lot more judges
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 01:05 PM
1 hr ago

On their version of a Supreme Court. I think the average size is 15 or more. 8 or 9 seems to be the smallest, while some have over 100 judges on their top courts.

I say the bigger the better. The bigger they are the harder it is to rig them and keep them rigged.

MarineCombatEngineer

(18,263 posts)
23. Not married yet, happening on July 4th but enjoying the bliss of my upcoming union
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 01:13 PM
1 hr ago

with my fiancé.

HappyH

(288 posts)
47. I am very happy for you MCE, you are a good man.
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 02:05 PM
13 min ago

I hope you guys have many happy years going forward,

duckworth969

(1,449 posts)
22. 13, one for each Circuit
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 01:09 PM
1 hr ago

Rotation system of some sort, age out (not popular for many), govt watchdog for corruption accountability similar to all other judges in our country, bye bye shadow docket.

Finally, if Alito is rude from the bench, he gets bitch slapped three times by a pro.

FakeNoose

(43,009 posts)
24. They need to rotate the leadership yes, plus it's not an appointment for life
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 01:26 PM
52 min ago

I think that has corrupted these judges more than any other thing. They should be appointed to a 10 year term, and it's NON-RENEWABLE. We have lots of federal judges in lower courts who never get a chance for appointment to the Supreme Court, and that's really unfair.

JustABozoOnThisBus

(24,783 posts)
30. Shhh! Don't talk about this until there is a Dem prez and a Dem senate.
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 01:34 PM
44 min ago

I'm surprised Trump hasn't already expanded the court with another four Federalist Society / Leonard Leo recommendations..

LiberalLovinLug

(14,777 posts)
34. If Democrats get enough of a majority and do this, will they shoot themselves in the foot with appeasement ?
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 01:44 PM
35 min ago

Because, based on past behavior, (Obama re-appointing Republican Comey, Biden appointing Republican Garland) I can totally see them trying to win over FOX News (which they never do) yet again by insisting that half have a Republican background. And go with the hope that they are moderate and non partisan in their thinking. (which they never are)

Figarosmom

(14,651 posts)
35. Yes and term limits
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 01:44 PM
34 min ago

It should have one judge per every 24,000,000 people or so. Made relative to number of people in the country.

xuplate

(258 posts)
36. Absolutely.
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 01:45 PM
33 min ago

SCROTUS is abusing the Constitution.on behalf of reactionary elites. Expanding the court is the most efficient way to end it.

mwmisses4289

(5,151 posts)
37. I'm for going back over every decision this court has made,
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 01:45 PM
33 min ago

and overturning many of their decisions.

HappyH

(288 posts)
44. Yes, expand to 13 when the next democrat is in the White House.
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 02:02 PM
16 min ago

1 for each Federal Circuit. I hoping that will happen in 2029 and we get 4 young and very liberal judges.

marble falls

(73,471 posts)
46. Still against. Whatever we do works for them, too, in another situation. So far SCOTUS rules against him 80% ...
Thu Jun 25, 2026, 02:03 PM
16 min ago

... of the time. Swap out Thomas and Alito and the number would go up.

All we need to do is not allow lame duck TACO name Thomas' replacement. If he dies in the eight years of a Democratic President and Congress. It's OK, too. Just don't let that lame duck name the next justice.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I used to be against expa...