Post

Statements from Dems like this one make it harder to press for Supreme Court reform. This ruling was a near-disaster and shows how unhinged SCOTUS has become—now just one vote away from overturning the 14th Amendment. But a sitting senator says they "applaud" the ruling.

And here's a similar one from the DNC. SCOTUS didn't "emphatically reject" the anti-birthright arguments. It barely did, by the skin of its teeth.

I read ~20 press releases from Dems & progressive groups that hit my inbox on the birthright ruling. They all sound exactly like those shared above. "Applauding," SCOTUS "reaffirms," "victory for rule of law," etc. Not one warns how close this was to a loss, or makes the case for SCOTUS reform.

Here's a better one, but for those who care about democracy, this case needs to be used as a jumping-off point to make the argument for SCOTUS reform.

I'm sharing this one, too, because it's not just moderate Dems missing the moment here. Folks are taking a victory lap or breathing a sigh of relief when it's a five-alarm fire.

30/6/26, 4:40 pm47 reposts199 likes

Better, but still needs to be tied to calls for SCOTUS reform

Matt Szafranski@mszafranski.bsky.social

It seems @massago.bsky.social is the first that puts out a statement noting how frightfully close the decision was.

I'm not criticizing these responses to dunk on Dems. I'm saying that powerful people utterly misunderstand the moment and are missing a critical opportunity to make the case for SCOTUS reform. I even wonder whether they understand the need for it.

Hakeem Jeffries@hakeem-jeffries.bsky.social

Birthright citizenship remains the law of the land. Out of many, one!

This is the best response to this decision I've seen so far from a sitting member of Congress.

Chris Murphy@chrismurphyct.bsky.social

Just shocking this was a 5-4 ruling. This Court is so so badly broken.

bobmlhs.bsky.social

@bobmlhs.bsky.social

I now heard that: 1) there were 2 dissenting votes; 2) it was 6-3; 3) now it is a 5-4. What was it?

gb5nm.bsky.social

@gb5nm.bsky.social

It is the best response, Murphy has his hand on the pulse I personally think he would be a fantastic Democratic candidate for President!

@magrag.bsky.social

This Supreme Court still has many years to overturn previous rulings by Justices in order to make our nation into the image they perceive it to be. Sure wish term limits were an option.

rationalpear.bsky.social

@rationalpear.bsky.social

why? What has he proposed in the way of reforms? Saying there’s a problem is very different than embracing deep comprehensive perform.

@sbamb.bsky.social

Chris Murphy isn't a crazy radical, either! You don't have to be to call a spade a spade.

JP Leskovich 🌈🕊💙 נַפְתָּלִי

@jplesko97.bsky.social

bsky.app/profile/reps...

Rep. Summer Lee@repsummerlee.bsky.social

Today’s ruling is a victory for our constitutional rights and for every child born in this country. We shouldn't have had such a close call. Six conservative justices should not have the power over generations to come. We must expand and reform the Court immediately.

Melinda🗽🇺🇸

@melindajean.bsky.social

Massive court reform, expansion, term limits and enforceable ethics as soon as we are in power, if we are ever in power. Nothing good can happen if this court stays as is. No more dicking around….we have to do it‼️

@prud-homme.org

Thank you for boosting this! I'm glad *someone* is paying attention!

jeppa1.bsky.social

@jeppa1.bsky.social

“powerful people utterly misunderstand the moment and are missing a critical opportunity to make the case for SCOTUS reform” worthy of dunking nonetheless

@wyrmwithwhy.bsky.social

I think that they spent a ton of effort from 2014 to 2024 to convey that the Supeme Court was vitally important and it did nothing for them electorally. I would not be shocked if they thought they should stop running in it.

@johnmullinax.bsky.social

Exactly this. A 5-4 result is not reassuring. This should've been 9-0.

@texaskrusty.bsky.social

He needs to be dunked on. That is yet another pathetic response.

sravebs.bsky.social

@sravebs.bsky.social

Problem is not the designed structure of the Supreme Co, but the current makeup of SCOTUS. Most members represent popular ideas from 18th & 19th centuries about presidential executive authority, women's place in society, government's role as social support, & white superiority. The world has grown.

@warehousepanda.bsky.social

The problem also includes "how did the current makeup get there" and "what do we do now that they are here" and the answer to both shows the need for court reform. It doesn't matter if a non-existent, theoretical court with the same structure works fine, the actual court here/now has to be changed.

John Dalton - brain marinated in woke sauce. They/them

@johndaledalton.bsky.social

Is there not a simple reform: make the appointments non-political?

Robert H Jackedson

@thatotherjim.bsky.social

I've gone back and forth on this a lot, and it's be really hard to do. Beyond the practicality (it'd take a constitutional amendment), the big problem is there's no real way to make the appointments non-political without also making the court dangerously unaccountable.

@greenkerfuffle.bsky.social

I think the people who swear up and down that they want a strong Republican Party and blame the senate parliamentarian when they renege on their campaign promises don’t actually want a manifestly different court

Matt Szafranski

@mszafranski.bsky.social

Campbell is the first I've seen in Mass that's a bit on the better side because it acknowledges the margin and the risks. bsky.app/profile/msza...

Matt Szafranski@mszafranski.bsky.social

It seems @massago.bsky.social is the first that puts out a statement noting how frightfully close the decision was.

Thanks for sharing this one. Definitely better.