WASHINGTON, D.C. — With the ideological balance of the U.S. Supreme Court firmly tilted to the right, a growing number of Democrats are reviving calls to expand the bench — a controversial move that could redefine the judiciary and ignite a political firestorm heading into the 2028 elections.
The Proposal: From Nine to Thirteen (or More)
At the heart of the debate is the Judiciary Act, reintroduced by Senator Edward Markey (D-MA) and Representative Hank Johnson (D-GA), which would increase the number of justices from nine to thirteen. The bill, backed by progressive lawmakers and advocacy groups, is framed as a corrective to what they see as a hijacked court — one shaped by Republican maneuvering, including the rushed confirmation of Justice Amy Coney Barrett in 2020.
Supporters argue that the current 6–3 conservative majority has issued rulings that undermine voting rights, reproductive freedom, and environmental protections. They believe expansion is not just a political necessity but a democratic imperative.
Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) has gone further, proposing a sweeping overhaul that would grow the court to 15 justices over 12 years and require supermajority votes to overturn acts of Congress.
What It Means for 2028
If Democrats secure a governing trifecta in 2028 — winning the presidency and both chambers of Congress — they could, in theory, pass court expansion legislation. But doing so would come at a steep political cost.
Key implications include:
-
A national referendum on judicial power. Court expansion would likely dominate the 2028 campaign, forcing candidates to take clear stances on an issue that divides even Democratic voters.
-
A conservative backlash. Republicans would mobilize their base around the idea of defending the Constitution and protecting the judiciary from “partisan tampering.”
-
Institutional strain. The move could trigger a tit-for-tat cycle, with future majorities expanding the court further, eroding its legitimacy and turning it into a political football.
Even some Democrats are wary. Moderates fear that court-packing could alienate swing voters and undermine the party’s broader legislative agenda. President Biden’s 2021 Supreme Court commission stopped short of endorsing expansion, citing concerns about destabilizing the court’s role as an independent arbiter.
Could This Blow Up the System?
Critics warn that expanding the court would shatter long-standing norms and plunge the country into a constitutional crisis. “This would be the judicial equivalent of nuclear war,” said one legal scholar. “Once you cross that line, there’s no going back.”
The Supreme Court has remained at nine justices since 1869. While the Constitution does not mandate a specific number, the stability of that figure has helped preserve the court’s perceived impartiality. Altering it for political gain, opponents argue, would reduce the judiciary to a partisan extension of whichever party holds power.
Even proponents acknowledge the danger. Former Attorney General Eric Holder has called for a “national reckoning” on judicial reform, warning that any changes must be grounded in principle, not revenge.
The Stakes
At its core, the court-packing debate is about more than numbers — it’s about the soul of American democracy. Will the judiciary remain a check on power, or become another arena for partisan warfare? As the 2028 election approaches, this question may define the political landscape.
Whether Democrats proceed with expansion or not, the mere discussion signals a profound shift in how Americans view the court — not as an impartial guardian of the Constitution, but as a battleground where the future of rights, freedoms, and governance is contested.
Add comment
Comments