OPINION: This article contains commentary which reflects the author's opinion
Joe Biden better tread carefully because even some staunch Democrats are none too pleased with one of his latest decisions.
On Friday Biden signed an executive order to create a bipartisan commission to examine possible changes to the Supreme Court, including the possibility of expanding the court to more than nine justices.
But one man who is not a fan of that idea is the former Senate Majority Leader and former Nevada Sen. Harry Reid, The Daily Wire reported.
Former Democrat Senator Harry Reid (NV) warned during a CNN interview on Saturday that Democrats need to be very careful when it comes to trying to alter the Supreme Court, including proposals to pack the court with leftist judges or trying to subject the justices to term limits.
CNN’s Jim Acosta asked Reid about whether he thought it was a good idea to pack the court, a push being made by the far-Left.
“I think it’s — we should be very, very careful in doing so. I have no problem with the commission, but I think that the commission is going to come back and disappoint a lot of people because I think they’re going to come back and say, we should just kind of leave it alone,” the former senator said. “I think it would be inappropriate at this time after that long history we’ve had in the country [to] have term limits for judges. I think that we better be very, very careful in saying that we need to expand the Supreme Court. I think we better be very, very, careful.”
Do you know how insane and partisan an idea you have to have when former Sen. Reid, the man who used the nuclear option to end the filibuster on judicial nominees, says it is too far?
The idea is also not supported by current liberal Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, and the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was also not a fan.
“If the public sees judges as ‘politicians in robes,’ its confidence in the courts, and in the rule of law itself, can only diminish, diminishing the court’s power, including its power to act as a ‘check’ on the other branches,” the justice said.
“The court’s decision in the 2000 presidential election case, Bush v. Gore, is often referred to as an example of its favoritism of conservative causes,” he said. “But the court did not hear or decide cases that affected the political disagreements arising out of the 2020 [Trump v. Biden] election.”
But he pointed to the court’s decision on Obamacare to show that the court is fair.
“It did uphold the constitutionality of Obamacare, the health-care program favored by liberals. It did reaffirm precedents that favored a woman’s right to an abortion. It did find unlawful certain immigration, census, and other orders, rules, or regulations, favored by a conservative president,” the justice said.
He said that “at the same time it made other decisions that can reasonably be understood as favoring ‘conservative’ policies and disfavoring ‘liberal’ policies. These considerations convince me that it is wrong to think of the court as another political institution.”
He pointed to the conservative justices, minus Chief Justice John Roberts, ruling that the state of California could not stop church services.
Use promo code "BRIEF"
and save up to 66%
Conservative Brief benefits when you use this promo code
“Why would all members of the court not agree that a state can limit inside attendance but not forbid it entirely?” Justice Breyer said. “The answer could be that some judges believe that the state must be especially careful when imposing restrictions upon religious worship. Others might believe that freedom of religion must give way to a consensus of scientific opinion at times of significant risks to health.”
The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg also expressed her concerns about packing the court before her death.
“Nine seems to be a good number. It’s been that way for a long time,” Justice Ginsburg said. “I think it was a bad idea when President Franklin Roosevelt tried to pack the court.”