Biden announces a committee to study change in the Supreme Court under pressure from progressives

Washington-President Joe Biden announced on Friday that he would form a committee for possible research. Supreme Court changesIn response to a call from the liberals, the nine-member bench was expanded to slow down the influence of former President Donald Trump on the courtroom.

Biden promised to nominate the Commission as a candidate in a Democratic protest over Trump’s three nominations. Supreme Court JudgeIncluding quick confirmation of Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett Just before the election, and A flock of judges in the lower court It tilted federal justice to the right.

The promotion of change in the National Supreme Court, where conservatives now have a 6 to 3 advantage, has put pressure on the White House. Throughout the campaign, Biden hedged when asked if he would support the expansion of the court, but in October he said Coat packing fan.. “

Biden’s bipartisan committee has a six-month deadline, but does not bind the White House to action. At that time, many considered the concept of committee as a workaround. This is a way to show progressives within the party that he has taken this issue seriously but is not afraid of middle-aged voters who are concerned about the further politicization of the courts.

More: Would you like to add a Supreme Court judge?Progressivist in the Clash Course with Biden

More: Supreme Court Judge Stephen Breyer Boosts “Court Packing”

Proponents are closely watching the signals about the Commission’s mission and membership. Biden signed an executive order on Friday and created a group of 36 members to hold a public meeting. The White House said it would investigate the length of service and replacement of judges, the size of the court and the choices, rules and practices of the case.

The judge currently has a lifelong appointment.

Progressive groups have promoted many other ideas in addition to increasing the number of judges. They probably include a term limit set at 18 years. Code of Ethics; A more formal process for counterarguments. Expansion of lower courts to counter the increasing number of cases, as well as offset the barrage of Trump’s appointees.

“The Supreme Court is dangerous to the health and welfare of the country, and even to democracy itself,” said Aaron Belkin of Take Back the Court, an advocate for expansion. “This White House Judiciary Reform Commission has a historic opportunity to explain the seriousness of the threat and help contain it.”

Belkin emphasized the tensions still existing within the Democratic Party on this issue and said the six-month timeline was too long.

“We don’t have time to spend six months studying this issue-especially without promising a real conclusion at the end,” he said. “The solution is already clear.”

Brian Fallon, the secretary-general of Progressive Group’s Demand Justice, described the committee as a “major nod” in favor of the change in court, but said it would not solve what he sees as a court problem. He said he didn’t think.

“It is unlikely that a committee of mostly scholars, including the far-right voice and not responsible for making formal recommendations, will make a significant advance in the ball of court reform,” Fallon said.

The committee also lit the fire from the right.

Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, the Republican Party, called it “a direct attack on our independent judicial body and yet another sign of its far-left influence on the Biden administration.”

Ilya Shapiro, vice president of the Libertarian Cato Institute, said the commission’s first impression gave him a pause. He said membership is piled up with “very progressive” scholars.

“The courts are the most respected government agency outside the military, and the restructuring debate essentially expresses the progressive elite’s dissatisfaction with the current composition,” Shapiro said in one of its recommendations. He added that he was not convinced that he was “nonpartisan, feasible, legal.” Or “actually improve the Supreme Court.”

In 1977, the Supreme Court established a broad definition of

In 1977, the Supreme Court established a broad definition of “excessive difficulty” faced by employers.

Proponents of expanding the court say that the number of judges in the Supreme Court is not constitutional and has often changed in the past. During the Civil War, Congress increased the court to 10 to secure a majority of federal policy, reduced the country’s best bench to 7 to reject President Andrew Johnson’s nomination, and courted President Ulysses S. Grant. Ratcheted up to 9 to give the majority of support. For his monetary policy.

At the same time, President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s failure to “stuff” the court in the second term underscores the fierce politics that Biden would face in such a move.

As a result, Biden avoided this question throughout most of last year’s presidential elections. Trump beat Biden on his evasive answer to this question.

A Supreme Court spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Opponents say that scaling up courts based on political pressure significantly undermines their work and adds a political veneer to institutions that superficially decide cases based on legal principles rather than politics. .. Associate Judge Stephen Breyer was the latest proponent At that point of the week.

In a widespread speech on Tuesday, Breyer warned Americans to consider structural changes in the courtroom “long and difficult.”

“Structural changes motivated by the perception of political influence can only cultivate that perception and further undermine its credibility,” Breyer said.

Bob Bauer, a former Obama White House adviser and Biden Campaign lawyer, co-chairs the committee with Christina Rodriguez, a professor at Yale Law School and a former Obama Justice Department employee. Other names include Sherilyn Ifil, chairman of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and Laurence Tribe, a constitutional expert at Professor Harvard Law.

Gabe Roth, secretary-general of Fix the Court, a nonpartisan group advocating increased transparency in federal justice, described the members nominated by the White House as “an incredible list of legal spirits.”

“I hope they can strongly consider the proposal to set future term limits by law rather than amendment and find consensus on the need to improve court’s lazy travel, disclosure and ethical rules,” he said. Told.

This article was originally published in USA TODAY: Supreme Court: Biden announces committee as liberals seek change