Why history shows 'court packing' isn't extreme

Article Image

Unearthed video from 2016 in a CBS News interview with Amy Coney Barrett shows her warning of Supreme Court appointments that "could dramatically flip the balance of power in the court."

Posted: Oct 12, 2020 4:01 PM
Updated: Oct 12, 2020 4:01 PM

At the presidential and vice presidential debates, Donald Trump and Mike Pence asked their opponents the same question: Will you pack the courts?

The symmetry of their approach shows they believe a focus on "court packing" could turn their ailing campaign around. And they got a quick assist from media outlets who began hammering the Biden campaign about the issue.

But "court packing" — as both a phrase and a historical precedent — obscures more than it reveals about the current debate over the size of the Supreme Court. That's because the parallel to President Franklin Roosevelt's efforts to change the court's size don't fit the current situation, and the broader history of court expansion bolsters the case for expanding the court now.

Expansion of the court rests in the hands of Congress, a right it has exercised several times in the nation's history. Rather than being "illicit" or "tyranny," as conservative critics have charged, it is an ordinary power of Congress granted by the Constitution. Over the course of the 19th century, the court fluctuated from five to 10 members, ultimately settling at nine. In many cases, the changes reflected fluctuations in the number of federal court districts. When districts were added or removed, the number of seats on the court changed with them. (For the record, there are currently 13 federal districts.)

Mixed in with these relatively neutral changes were more politically motivated ones. In fact, the first change to the Supreme Court came as part of the "midnight judges" scandal of 1801, when Federalists doubled the number of district judges and shrank the size of the Supreme Court from six to five after they lost the election of 1800, hoping to install as many as their allies as possible before Thomas Jefferson became president.

Because this was an act of Congress, Jefferson's legislative allies were able to simply repeal the law in 1802, bumping the Supreme Court back up to six seats.

And then, of course, there was the famous attempt to pack the court in 1937. Franklin Roosevelt, irritated that a conservative court kept striking down legislation aimed at reviving the economy during the Great Depression, proposed adding a slew of new justices under the guise of court reform. The effort technically failed — Congress never passed the legislation — though the court became more amenable to New Deal legislation in the sessions that followed.

In the case of both Adams and Roosevelt, the system broadly worked to check political power grabs. Congress rectified the court's size in 1802 and rejected its expansion in 1937.

Today, the situation is quite different. First, the call for a change to the court's size is not a response to specific rulings that Democrats disagree with. There were few widespread calls for an expanded court following the decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller, which vastly expanded gun-ownership rights, Shelby Co. v. Holder, which gutted the Voting Rights Act, or even Citizens United v. FEC, a ruling so universally reviled by voters that a 2010 Washington Post-ABC News poll found even 76% of Republicans disagreed with it (85% of Democrats and 81% of independents did, too — though many Republican officeholders welcomed the influx of money into campaigns).

What's really driving the renewed interest in court expansion is something else: the politicized change in the size of the court has already happened. It occurred in 2016, when a Republican-controlled Senate allowed the court to shrink to eight justices. Not only did the Senate fail to fulfill its constitutional duty to vote on the president's nominee, some Senate Republicans were prepared to keep the court at eight if Hillary Clinton won the 2016 election. Sen. Ted Cruz and the late Sen. John McCain both floated that possibility in October 2016, with Cruz musing, "There is certainly long historical precedent for a Supreme Court with fewer justices."

The refusal to even hold a hearing for a presidential nominee was more than a norm violation — it was an abdication of constitutional responsibility. And because it was one that worked out well for Republicans, there has been no reckoning.

Until now. The Biden campaign has not yet weighed in on expanding the court, but there is a groundswell of support for it from Democrats who believe it is the only way to remedy what happened in 2016. That makes a more accurate precedent for the court-expansion debate not the 1937 attempt, but 1802, when Congress returned the court to six seats after Adams attempted to take a seat from Jefferson and pack the lower courts with his allies.

These historical precedents help put the current debate in a more accurate context than blanket condemnations of "court packing." But they should not be thought of as straightjackets constraining the bounds of debate. Historical precedent can serve as a guide to how people have considered these issues in the past, but they are not an excuse to ignore the unique conditions of the current crisis: The Republicans' smash-and-grab approach to judicial nominations threatens the independence and legitimacy of the judiciary and weakens the rule of law.

Should Democrats win the election, they will have to fix this, too. That likely means court expansion, but also a raft of judicial reforms ranging from Supreme Court term limits to narrowing its jurisdiction. It likely means coming to terms with a reality most Americans have never really confronted: The court has never been apolitical, and even with reforms, there will be fights over its composition and power — fights Democrats must be willing to take up.

Huntsville/Madison
Clear
46° wxIcon
Hi: 53° Lo: 30°
Feels Like: 42°
Muscle Shoals
Clear
46° wxIcon
Hi: 54° Lo: 30°
Feels Like: 42°
Huntsville/Madison
Clear
46° wxIcon
Hi: 52° Lo: 28°
Feels Like: 42°
Decatur
Clear
44° wxIcon
Hi: 53° Lo: 31°
Feels Like: 42°
Fort Payne
Clear
47° wxIcon
Hi: 53° Lo: 31°
Feels Like: 42°
WAAY Radar
WAAY WAAY-TV Cam
WAAY Temperatures

Alabama Coronavirus Cases

Cases: 436087

Reported Deaths: 6486
CountyCasesDeaths
Jefferson63969994
Mobile31211565
Madison27851208
Tuscaloosa21233271
Montgomery19698326
Shelby19093130
Baldwin16981188
Lee13036105
Morgan12526134
Etowah11987179
Calhoun11441206
Marshall10357123
Houston8886158
Limestone827876
Cullman8203108
Elmore8120104
DeKalb7828103
Lauderdale7798103
St. Clair7763125
Talladega6394111
Walker6002177
Jackson594644
Colbert545276
Blount543986
Autauga532761
Coffee456762
Dale406883
Franklin372448
Russell349212
Chilton342873
Covington336068
Escambia330144
Dallas312096
Tallapoosa3120107
Chambers301170
Clarke293336
Pike261131
Marion251558
Lawrence250752
Winston232742
Bibb221248
Geneva208746
Marengo206529
Pickens199031
Hale182742
Barbour179337
Fayette177029
Butler172459
Cherokee164330
Henry158224
Monroe151320
Randolph144336
Washington140127
Clay129146
Crenshaw122944
Macon120937
Cleburne120724
Lamar119721
Lowndes113736
Wilcox106622
Bullock102228
Perry99118
Conecuh96821
Sumter90026
Greene76823
Coosa63215
Choctaw51724
Out of AL00
Unassigned00

Tennessee Coronavirus Cases

Cases: 701847

Reported Deaths: 8777
CountyCasesDeaths
Shelby779711168
Davidson72385688
Knox39701432
Hamilton35466337
Rutherford33860294
Unassigned23587134
Williamson21906144
Sumner18644232
Out of TN1615282
Montgomery14979149
Wilson14728164
Sullivan12893218
Blount12267132
Washington12102203
Maury11179128
Bradley1108895
Sevier10704120
Putnam10116151
Madison9273183
Robertson782687
Hamblen7172117
Anderson6947114
Greene6719115
Tipton632969
Gibson5733114
Coffee573282
Dickson552682
Cumberland550576
Bedford540391
Roane530081
Lawrence518869
Carter5171115
McMinn516774
Warren504454
Loudon503550
Jefferson490178
Dyer483386
Monroe467063
Hawkins455272
Franklin420065
Fayette408751
Obion404582
Rhea388457
Lincoln385546
Marshall353338
Cocke352758
Cheatham347331
Weakley344248
Henderson336559
Campbell334940
Giles330574
Carroll315860
White315144
Hardeman314054
Hardin304250
Lauderdale296933
Macon293251
Wayne267424
Henry266958
Overton258846
DeKalb246342
McNairy245442
Haywood243747
Smith234230
Marion233932
Trousdale230315
Scott228832
Hickman227835
Claiborne224932
Fentress215734
Grainger214339
Johnson204634
Morgan193916
Crockett182438
Chester177439
Bledsoe177011
Unicoi169545
Cannon160320
Lake157821
Decatur148628
Polk147817
Union143225
Grundy142622
Sequatchie140319
Humphreys136717
Benton133435
Lewis130121
Meigs117616
Stewart109620
Jackson105723
Perry95825
Clay95426
Houston94624
Moore8299
Pickett69020
Van Buren6737
Hancock4177

Community Events