(The Center Square) – All but one Democrat in the U.S. House helped tank a proposed constitutional amendment Wednesday afternoon that would limit the U.S. Supreme Court to nine justices.
The 212-206 vote, which also saw eight Democrats abstain from voting, failed to reach the two-thirds requirement for passage under suspension of the rules, a process that fast-tracks bills.
Both parties are using the vote as a political cudgel. Republicans are accusing Democrats of planning to pack the nation’s highest court and corrupt the institution.
“The Democrats want to stage a takeover of an institution built to stay above politics by stacking the bench with judges who answer to their radical base instead of the Constitution,” the Republican Study Committee, which consists of 188 members, posted on social media after the unsuccessful vote. “It's un-American and against the very principles this country was built on.”
Democrats are claiming that Republicans are trying to distract U.S. taxpayers from more pressing issues and also strip Congress of its powers.
“After sycophantically surrendering to Donald Trump our war powers, spending powers, tariff powers, and powers over federal buildings, to name a few, now they want to give up a power we have had since the Republic was founded: the power to decide how many Justices will be on the Supreme Court,” Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., posted on social media before the vote.
“We have exercised this power seven times in our history, with the Court having as many as 10 Justices and as few as six. I will vote against this radical measure abdicating a power assigned to us by the Framers simply to please a would-be king.”
The proposed amendment read ‘‘The Supreme Court of the United States shall be composed of nine justices consisting of one chief justice and eight associate justices.”
Notably, Democratic leaders did not rule out the possibility of inflating the number of Supreme Court justices in the future.
“Over the course of history, Congress has periodically exercised its constitutional authority to pass legislation changing the size, structure, and jurisdiction of the Court and federal judiciary to reflect political, geographic, and demographic changes in the country,” House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., wrote in a statement to colleagues.
“H.J.Res. 1 is not a serious effort to improve our constitutional system or address the challenges everyday Americans are facing. It is yet another attempt by House Republicans to surrender Congress’ constitutional powers and oversight duties over both the President and the Supreme Court,” she added.
(The Center Square) – The U.S. Department of Justice has sued the Kansas City, Kansas Public Schools district, alleging it facilitated secret gender transitions for children at schools without parents' knowledge or consent.
One of Mizzou's most valuable players barely makes an impact on the offensive stat sheet. But Jordon Harris's blocking makes him important to the Tigers' attack. His character makes him important to his hometown of Pine Bluff, Arkansas.
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism
that is degrading to another person. Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness
accounts, the history behind an article.
(0) comments
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Post a comment as Guest
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.