How Could Democrats Defy Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Wishes by Trying to Pack the Supreme Court?

(AP Photo/Stephan Savoia)

It was the understanding amongst Democrats that the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s word was somewhere between law and holy writ, and that anyone defying her wishes, be they Democrat or Republican, was just an unconscionable thing to do.

Well, fun fact that’s surprising no one: Democrats don’t actually care what Ruth Bader Ginsburg thinks and are more than willing to go against her wishes if it means more power for them.

Back in September of 2020, Democrats proclaimed that RGB’s dying words were exactly “my most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.”

It’s highly unlikely that this was the case, as RGB’s dying words seemed a bit too politically weighted and insanely convenient at a time when then-President Donald Trump had the opportunity to replace Ginsburg with someone a bit more Constitution-friendly.

Democrats made a very big deal out of the fact that Republicans were heartless for rejecting the dying wish of a great woman and brought it up at almost every opportunity. Her dying wish even dominated headlines for a couple of days and came up in conversation between talking heads way too often. Republicans laughed it off, as they should.

But now, Democrats are in power and they have the opportunity to change the makeup of the Supreme Court forever by expanding it from nine to 13 and packing it with radical ideologues who will morph this nation into an unrecognizable mess. Republicans are very, very against that. So are some Democrats.

Know who else was against it?

Ruth Holy Bader Ginsburg.

Back in 2019, Ginsburg sat down for an interview with NPR and said in no uncertain terms that nine is the magic number for the Supreme Court and that expanding it out is a “bad idea.”

“Nine seems to be a good number. It’s been that way for a long time,” she said, adding, “I think it was a bad idea when President Franklin Roosevelt tried to pack the court.”

Ginsburg was actually against the court looking partisan, and nothing says “partisan” like court packing.

“If anything would make the court look partisan,” she said, “it would be that — one side saying, ‘When we’re in power, we’re going to enlarge the number of judges, so we would have more people who would vote the way we want them to.'”

Uh-oh.

Do Democrats actually care about the wisdom of RGB? Or were RGB’s words just a useful tool for them to use like everything else the Democrats hold dear is?

RGB’s soul can rest easy. It’s highly unlikely that any attempt at court packing will succeed, as Democrats have too many hurdles to overcome in order to get legislation that would open the door for it passed. The Senate has the filibuster to deal with, as well as dissenting Democrats like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. The House doesn’t look much better, as just losing three votes is enough to bring the legislation crashing down there.

Regardless, it would appear that RGB’s words aren’t as important to Democrats as they once claimed. Sorry, Ruth.