FILE – This Jan. 25, 2012, file photo, shows the U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington. The Supreme Court enters its final week of work before a long summer hiatus with action expected on the Trump administration’s travel ban and a decision due in a separation of church and state case that arises from a Missouri church playground. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)

Throughout history, court packing has been a favorite tactic of aspiring dictators. When they can’t gain the power they seek via legal methods, they simply change the makeup of the court so as to have them nullify any law that stands in the way.

This is one of the ways that Venezuala’s Maduro solidified his hold on power. When his Socialist party was beaten in elections in 2015, the outgoing members of the Congress simply appointed 13 new Supreme Court justices to ensure they maintained control. This has of course led to the full ruination of the country, with citizens starving and living without other basic necessities.

The United States has it’s own dark history with the tactic. Former President Franklin D. Roosevelt was upset that parts of his disastrous “New Deal” were being found unconstitutional. In response, he came up with a scheme to appoint a new Supreme Court Justice for every current Justice over 70 years old. In the end, this dictatorial threat was enough to make then Justice Owen Roberts change his mind and fold to Roosevelt’s demands in order to preserve the court.

Well, it’s 2020, but old, tyrannical ideas die hard. Democrats running for President next year have decided that they simply don’t like the rulings the Supreme Court has been giving.

Their solution? Pack the courts to regain the advantage.

The courts have emerged as a lightning rod during the Trump administration for the Democratic Party’s resurgent base, which remains deeply bitter over Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) decision to block Merrick Garland, President Obama’s final Supreme Court nominee.

Supporters argue that sweeping reforms, including expanding the number of justices, are needed to counteract Trump and McConnell, who they say have “packed” the judicial system with conservative judges — including two Supreme Court justices and a record number of influential appeals court picks.

Mitch McConnell has worked within our constitutional system and continues to. A President appointing judges while he’s President is not “packing” the court as alleged here. It’s normal governance that’s been afforded to every other executive before him.

Several 2020 hopefuls have already endorsed the idea of “court reform” (which is code for packing the court for political reasons) while most of the rest are playing footsie with it.

Good news for Beto fans. He’s all for it.

South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg and former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke have both signaled they could support expanding the court.

“This central objective that is to prevent the Supreme Court from continuing on this trajectory to become basically ruined by being a nakedly political institution,” Buttigieg said during an interview with “Pod Save America.” “This idea of adding justices is one way to do it.”

Then there are those who are clearly for it but don’t want to quite commit yet.

Both Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) told Politico that the option should be on the table as part of a larger conversation among Democrats about the direction of the American judicial system.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) told “Pod Save America” that the idea was “interesting” and she would “need to think more about it.”

Even The Bulwark and Never Trump favorite, Amy Klobuchar, is all but endorsing the idea.

sked about expanding the Supreme Court, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who was given an F by the group, told NBC’s Chuck Todd during an interview released Sunday that “I think you could consider it.”

“I’m a practical person. And what I’m looking at right now is how do you stop Donald Trump from putting on clearly unqualified people, clearly partisan people like nominees Kavanaugh and Gorsuch to the Supreme Court,” she said. “Well, the best way you stop it is by taking back the White House.”

In other words, the ends justify the tyrannical means. The idea that Kavanaugh and Gorsuch were unqualified is laughable, especially considering how partisan Obama’s appointees have been.

Keep in mind, these are the same Democrats that call Trump going to the bathroom an act of authoritarianism. Yet, here they are calling for the packing of courts like petty dictators because they lost an election. Much like the electoral college, their guiding principle seems to be that if you can’t win fairly, just change the game.

This is why it’s so important to see to it that the Democratic party suffers defeat in 2020. If you don’t like Donald Trump, fine. But those “conservatives” opining that Trump has disrupted norms so much (Narrator: he really hasn’t) that we must vote for Democrats to reset the board are crazy. They deserve to be shunned and called out for the faux principles they always preach about.

Take Never Trumper Tom Nichols for example.

I'd rather have a chance of fighting it out in the public arena over the size of SCOTUS (which I doubt anyone is going to change) over what we have now. But I guess that makes me a Democrat because apparently everything not-Trump is a Democrat now. https://t.co/WEfLzbyzja

— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) March 18, 2019

By the way, for those who want to read the argument I actually made about voting against the institutional GOP right down to the grassroots, you can find it here:https://t.co/RmGmwWiK0X

— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) March 18, 2019

You see Tom, we aren’t concerned with saving the GOP in your image. We are concerned with the constitution being set on fire just to appease your petty revenge fantasy. His argument is hilarious. “Yeah, the Democrats want to do something tyrannical, but they probably won’t succeed, so go ahead and vote for them to stop the guy who tweets too much.”

Oddly enough, that kind of nonsense passes for intellectual thought in certain conservative circles. There’s a certain level of arrogance behind their push, thinking they can control the harm Democrats will cause if they regain total control. In reality, people like Nichols and Kristol are just useful idiots to the Democratic party. The moment they take back the Presidency and/or Senate, they’ll cast the Never Trump movement aside and assign them no influence. The damage will be done at that point.

As 2020 heats up, things are going to get more and more insane. There appears to be no illiberal, dangerous policy that Democrats won’t adopt to appease their base. Whether it be reparations, socialism, or now court packing.

It should also be noted that the media, who’ve spent years telling us how dangerous Donald Trump is for doing normal, constitution things, can’t even be bothered to feign outrage over 3rd world suggestions of packing the Supreme Court. They report on it as if it’s just a completely acceptable suggestion. Don Lemon isn’t losing his mind. Erin Burnett isn’t telling us about how this mirrors authoritarian actions throughout history. I wonder why?

In the end, I suspect the American people will rise up to stop this. At least I sure hope they do.

————————————————-

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.