Kamala Harris endorses Biden's radical Supreme Court 'reform' proposal



Vice President Kamala Harris has now endorsed a radical proposal from her boss, Joe Biden, that would overhaul the U.S. Supreme Court, signaling that she has not abandoned her far-left record even as she attempts to win over voters in swing states during the 2024 presidential campaign.

On Monday, Biden proposed three major changes to the makeup and inner workings of SCOTUS, as Blaze News previously reported. Biden wants 18-year term limits as well as a "binding code of conduct" for all justices. Taking aim at the lawfare campaigns he has allegedly unleashed on former President Donald Trump as well as a recent SCOTUS decision regarding presidential immunity, Biden also wants a constitutional amendment proclaiming that "no one is above the law."

Harris continues to champion leftist pipe dreams — such as radically altering one of the three branches of government — that likely appeal to idealogues in California but not to blue-collar workers in Rust Belt states like Pennsylvania and Michigan.

"I share our Founders’ belief that the president’s power is limited, not absolute. We are a nation of laws — not of kings or dictators," Biden apparently wrote.

On Monday evening, Harris announced her support for Biden's SCOTUS "reform" proposal, calling it critical for shoring up public "confidence" in our nation's highest court.

"There is a clear crisis of confidence facing the U.S. Supreme Court. That is why President @JoeBiden and I are calling on Congress to pass important reforms — from imposing term limits to requiring compliance with binding ethics rules," Harris wrote on X.

"And in our democracy, no one should be above the law. So we must also ensure that no former President has immunity for crimes committed while in the White House."

— (@)

As several outlets, including left-wing sources like Vox and the Daily Beast, have noted, the proposal has almost no chance of becoming the law of the land, especially since at least some of the ideas contained within it would require changing the Constitution.

Plus, Biden and Harris have made no effort to advance it along. According to the New York Post, Senate Democrats who would normally be tasked with drawing up legislation about such a proposal were not even briefed on its contents.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) likewise stated that the Biden-Harris proposal has no chance of passing the House:

This proposal is the logical conclusion to the Biden-Harris Administration and Congressional Democrats’ ongoing efforts to delegitimize the Supreme Court. Their calls to expand and pack the Court will soon resume. It is telling that Democrats want to change the system that has guided our nation since its founding simply because they disagree with some of the Court’s recent decisions. This dangerous gambit of the Biden-Harris Administration is dead on arrival in the House.

But perhaps more importantly, Harris' support for the proposal reveals that she is not attempting to moderate some of her left-wing positions even amidst a tough presidential race. Though some in the media have attempted to obscure her record as the Biden administration border czar and her support for a group that bailed out violent rioters in 2020, Harris continues to champion leftist pipe dreams — such as radically altering one of the three branches of government — that likely appeal to idealogues in California but not to blue-collar workers in Rust Belt states like Pennsylvania and Michigan.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Mike Lee issues challenge to Elizabeth Warren after she claims 'right-wing extremists' have 'hijacked' Supreme Court



Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) challenged Democratic colleague Sen. Elizabeth Warren to a debate this week over her renewed demands to pack the Supreme Court.

What did Warren say?

Amid new allegations of ethical impropriety against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Warren claimed on Monday that "right-wing extremists" have "hijacked" the Supreme Court.

The only antidote for such a disease, according to Warren, is to pack the court with justices who would issue rulings that she agrees with. She couched her demands using language about "rebalance" and protecting "our democracy."

"I'll just be blunt: right-wing extremists have hijacked the Supreme Court of the United States. From shredding abortion rights to rigging the rules against workers and consumers, an out-of-touch majority is substituting their own views for the rule of law," Warren said.

"For the sake of our freedoms and the sake of our democracy, we must expand the Supreme Court to rebalance it, and we need to institute a binding code of ethics for the justices," she added.

\u201cFor the sake of our freedoms and the sake of our democracy, we must expand the Supreme Court to rebalance it, and we need to institute a binding code of ethics for the justices.\u201d
— Elizabeth Warren (@Elizabeth Warren) 1682345129

How did Lee respond?

The Utah Republican offered to debate Warren about the merits of her demands.

"I'd love to debate you on this topic at a mutually agreeable time and venue," he told her on Tuesday.

Lee also directed Warren to his book, "Saving Nine," which makes a comprehensive argument against expanding the Supreme Court. Some of the most compelling evidence in Lee's book focuses on the words of Democrats and liberal-leaning justices who warned against packing the court.

\u201c.@ewarren, I\u2019d love to debate you on this topic at a mutually agreeable time and venue. In the meantime, please take a look at Saving Nine, which I wrote to defend the position previously held by @POTUS\u2014that packing the Supreme Court would harm all of us. https://t.co/6ImeXEpRuV\u201d
— Mike Lee (@Mike Lee) 1682395368

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, for instance, was a prominent critic of Democrats'' ideas of "court reform."

"I have heard that there are some people on the Democratic side who would like to increase the number of judges. I think that was a bad idea when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt tried to pack the court," Ginsburg told NPR in 2019.

"[I]f anything would make the court appear partisan then it would be that, one side saying, 'When we're in power we're going to enlarge the number of judges so we'll have more people who will vote the way we want them to,'" she added.

Warren did not respond to Lee's debate challenge.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

How The Right Can Work With The Left On Curtailing The Supreme Court’s Power

After rightfully complaining about judicial overreach, can conservatives afford to categorically reject reforms that would constrain the court’s power?

Eric Holder demands Democrats use their new power to pack courts: 'Necessary and totally appropriate'



Former Attorney General Eric Holder wants Democrats to use their newfound power to pack the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary with ideologically liberal justices.

What's the background?

Former President Donald Trump made a generational difference in the federal judiciary: Of those judges Trump nominated, the Senate confirmed 174 to federal district courts, 54 to appellate courts, and three to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Democrats, aware of Trump's judicial legacy, were in an uproar last year following the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. Ever since then, Democrats have made public declarations that they need to "pack the courts" with ideologically liberal justices if they want to regain judicial influence.

These calls, which have even come from scores of Democratic lawmakers, advocate for ideological court-packing, which includes expanding the size of the Supreme Court.

What did Holder say?

Now that Democrats control the White House with President Joe Biden, control the House, and have effective control over the Senate, Holder demanded on Monday that Democrats leverage their power to counteract Trump's judicial legacy.

"It is painfully clear Democrats and progressives are uncomfortable with the acquisition and use of power, while Republicans and conservatives never have been," Holder said during a virtual conference hosted by the Brookings Institution, the Washington Times reported.

"Our courts badly need reforms," Holder continued. "The Republicans have abused their power to give themselves an unfair advantage."

"It is necessary and totally appropriate to add seats," Holder declared.

Not only should the Supreme Court be expanded and packed, Holder said, but so should the appellate courts. According to the Times, Holder also spoke in favor of judicial term limits.

Will Biden expand the courts?

Biden infamously shied away from the question during his campaign last fall before finally suggesting that he was open to the idea.

However, Biden said he was "not a fan" of court-packing because it would likely trigger a partisan seesaw that shifts when ideological power changes hands in Congress and the White House.

Still, Biden has pledged to convene a bipartisan commission to study reforming the federal judiciary. Wholesale changes, if any are made, will likely only come in response to suggestions made by that commission.

Anything else?

Perhaps the most ironic aspect of Democrats' push to expand and pack the federal courts is that Ginsburg, the revered left-leaning jurist, thought court-packing was a terrible idea.

Speaking with NPR in 2019, Ginsburg explained why she did not like former President Franklin Roosevelt's attempts at packing the Supreme Court.

I have heard that there are some people on the Democratic side who would like to increase the number of judges. I think that was a bad idea when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt tried to pack the court. His plan was for every justice who stays on the court past the age of 70, the president would have the authority to nominate another justice. If that plan had been effective, the court's number would have swelled immediately from nine to 15, and the president would have six appointments to make.

You mention before the quote of appearing partisan. Well, if anything would make the court appear partisan then it would be that, one side saying, "When we're in power we're going to enlarge the number of judges so we'll have more people who will vote the way we want them to."

"So, I am not at all in favor of that solution to what I see is a temporary situation," Ginsburg declared.

RBG: “Bad idea when [FDR] tried to pack the court… If anything would make the court appear partisan it'd be...one s… https://t.co/qkdeQGPVYg
— Jerry Dunleavy (@Jerry Dunleavy)1600545766.0