Post

Jay Willis
@jaywillis.net

Important to remember that the legal profession will never take the lead on Supreme Court reform. Its leaders have too much invested in the notion that the Court is fundamentally Good and Right, and that solving for the real-world consequences of its worst decisions is someone else’s problem.

Lawfare@lawfaremedia.org

"Court-packing would create a slippery slope to the destruction of judicial review...To the extent Callais is a problem, it can be better addressed by steps such as banning gerrymandering. There are also better remedies for various other shortcomings of the Court," writes @ilyasomin.bsky.social.

lawfaremedia.orgWhy Callais Doesn’t Justify Court-PackingTo the extent Callais is a problem, it can be better addressed by steps such as banning gerrymandering.

59 reposts228 likes

Hortensius
@dsb24.bsky.social

A lawyer can believe that the Court is currently not "good and right" and also believe that court packing is not the solution. Staggered appointments with mandatory senior status could be. Voters putting moderates in Congress and the White House on a prolonged basis could be as well.

Jay Willis
@jaywillis.net

One thing I really believe is that, assuming the Trump Court continues on its current trajectory, Supreme Court expansion will happen. But lawyers (especially elite ones with a vested interest in the Court’s supremacy) will always find reasons to argue against it. Just the way it goes.

Jay Willis
@jaywillis.net

“Congress should not expand the Supreme Court. Instead, voters in insanely gerrymandered districts should simply overcome the GOP’s Senate advantage and elect politicians who might someday possibly produce a less bad Court” is about as tidy an illustration of “it’s someone else’s problem” as it gets

Hortensius@dsb24.bsky.social

A lawyer can believe that the Court is currently not "good and right" and also believe that court packing is not the solution. Staggered appointments with mandatory senior status could be. Voters putting moderates in Congress and the White House on a prolonged basis could be as well.

Call Me Lila
@callmelila.bsky.social

Let's not forget that Gorsuch is sitting in an Obama seat and the little lady who said she'd follow "stare decisis" and not make her own rules (as they all did BTW) was seated while votes were being cast for Biden.

Nate
@nkb121.bsky.social

Yeah, exactly, maybe the biggest issue with the kind of incremental change this guy is describing is that it would, in a best case, taking fucking decades to come to fruition. So we gotta suffer through all this horrible shit currently happening right now for how long??

Josh Chafetz
@joshchafetz.bsky.social

Honestly, I think I face at least as much pushback from nonlawyers about Court expansion as from lawyers. Nonlawyers are often just as steeped in juristocracy, but less intimately familiar with exactly how bad the Court is.