post malone ergo propter malone: I think there is basically consensus now among elected Dems that court reform is necessary, if there wasn't before.

I think there is basically consensus now among elected Dems that court reform is necessary, if there wasn't before.

a moderately sized win in this election will likely be sufficient to do it.

Dems taking the trifecta seems like enough. Plus one timely passing among Thomas, Alito, or roberts.

if Dems take the trifecta I think that's enough now, full stop

do you know if any insider-ish type has put out something about what the likely reform would be? The options, from packing to jurisdiction stripping etc. have a pretty wide range of impact and norm breaking

Adding a justice for each circuit+adding a circuit or two is something that I think dems could pitch as serving a functional purpose as well as shifting the balance of the court

I’ve long thought this was the sensible approach. Rs and NYT will howl, but it won’t feel like overreach to the vast majority of D voters. Especially now.

no and I doubt we'll get that level of detail ahead of an opportunity to do it

I don’t know that we *should* really. They should run on countering the corrupt court and then hash out what’s the maximum they can get out of the legislature once they’re there.

Durbin’s ethics code will be part of it, but likely not the end of it.

If one of them dies, the Court may reform itself; if two of them do, it definitely will. But frankly the system is out of whack and you should pursue it anyway.

Not if Donny gets elected

Phew. I was worried it was going to be a big lift.

Though I think my point is that there’s a plausible path to doing so (Ie don’t give up hope)

Am I naive in thinking this ruling could be a huge boost to Democrats electorally in this cycle?

snap poll had it as a 70/30 against, "Presidents are not Kings" is a snappy motto, yeah it can be an electoral boon imo. just gotta hammer it

Between this and Dobbs, the story of this era may wind up being "they lit the match too soon"

hope so

Yeah I mean I could imagine a hypothetical in which Trump loses this election *because* of this ruling whereas he otherwise wouldn’t have. We’ll never know, but it’s interesting to think about, especially if it’s real close.

Some pac should be running spots listing all his crimes from the first term, and saying imagine what he would do knowing he is above the law.

also if superman came down and took over that would be cool

You joke but a whole bunch of fuckers wanna be ruled like that. Benevolent dictator who shares their views is their ideal government.

yeah but my joke was based more on probabilities

my only worry is if they win and suddenly Trump will seem far away again and court remote will suddenly not seem urgent to a couple of vulnerable senators

well, that's certainly not my *only* worry

it's possible but the Dems who are up in 2026 who are in some danger are pretty stalwart

Smith was already calling for court expansion yesterday and today she’s doubling down.

Let's say you wave the magic wand and get court reform, get a reasonable USSC, etc., etc. One thing I haven't seen answered is, what then? It stops the bleeding, but how do all these horrible rulings get reversed? Does it take a decade of bad law to slowly get reviews by the USSC?

How do you scope out the “art of the possible” in these scenarios? I agree there’s definitely no one interested in another toothless commission/review like there was early on in this admin. That always struck me as weird and shortsighted.

that's what congressional leadership does

Fair enough, and I assume it’s also foolhardy to game out the art of the possible when *who knows* what garbage is still coming down the pipe before November.

I'm not quite this optimistic - I think there is still a lot of inertia from older heads and reluctance from center-right factions of the party (Gottheimer, etc) - but even if it's not now, I think it's soon, and it's inevitable.

inshallah

SCOTUS has long benefitted from a veneer of bipartisanship, and that's been burnt to the ground now.

theyre gonna need to convince people their idea of reform isnt just "this is bad send money" for another 4 years

I'm just hoping that Joe is being deliberate and slow about coming around to it rather than resisting it

I am confident Biden would be on board now

I do suspect we’d need to suggest the most extreme restructuring option possible to get him to where we-the-left want him to be but that has been true of Biden basically his entire career.

"move every federalist society judge to a newly created federal circuit on little Diomede island alaska"

Send them to wherever Julian Assange just pleaded out

Using executive actions that begin with the phrase "In my official capacity as President of the United States," of course.

I like it. How about "declare the federalist society a hate group and make membership a lifetime ban from practicing law in any form"?

He will move to the consensus middle so keep pushing!

Empanel 7 random Article III judges to grant cert to a different random panel of Article III judges to decide.

I’m only sort of kidding! A true court reform would reduce the salience of the supreme court, not by hoping for better judges but by changing the systemic incentives.

I don’t think he’s the mover here, and I think whatever Congress manages to get passed, he’s gonna sign.

Absolutely valid, I was speaking to getting Biden on-side with the idea, not how you get it enacted. For Congress I think the same pressure applies -- get them to see that the reasonable middle ground *is* expansion and scaling back some of their unwritten powers.

We may be in Edith Wilson territory...

i mean, maybe?? one of biden's first acts as president was establishing a commission that issued a finding recommending against any judicial reforms and admonishing against taking actions that might diminish the public's perception of the courts' legitimacy

Post