Unpacking SCOTUS

Like I said in another post, the dems do not need to "pack" the court.

quote:

---

What’s interesting is, I don’t ever recall seeing a Dem/Marxist nominated judge that swings to the right. But damn, it seems like half our Republican judges swing left after being appointed to SCOTUS.

---

Usually this way on votes in the House and Senate as well.

Definitely a one-way street.

quote:

---

Ca we use another term instead of pack? Expand is the proper terminology.

---

There is a nuanced difference. Grok explains better than I can:

quote:

---

The Nuanced Difference: Intent, Perception, and FramingCourt Packing (the loaded, negative term):Emphasizes partisan manipulation or "rigging" the Court to achieve a desired outcome.
Carries historical baggage from Franklin D. Roosevelt’s 1937 plan to add up to six justices (one for every justice over 70 who didn’t retire). It was widely seen as an attack on judicial independence because the explicit goal was to protect New Deal legislation from a conservative Court.
Implies the motive is primarily ideological capture rather than institutional improvement. Critics use it to suggest the proposer is undermining the Constitution’s spirit, even if not the letter.
Rhetorical flavor: Sneaky, power-grab, precedent-breaking in a dangerous way. It evokes accusations of turning the Court into just another political branch.

Court Expanding (the more neutral or positive framing):Focuses on structural or practical reform — e.g., the Court has grown in caseload and national importance since 1869 (when it was last set at 9), so more justices could improve efficiency, allow for specialization, or better represent a larger country.
Downplays or omits overt partisan intent. Proponents might argue it’s about modernization, diversity of viewpoints, or correcting perceived imbalances caused by past events (long tenures, strategic retirements, etc.).
Rhetorical flavor: Reasonable, forward-looking, pragmatic governance. It sounds like routine institutional adjustment rather than a targeted political weapon

---

.

quote:

---

What’s interesting is, I don’t ever recall seeing a Dem/Marxist nominated judge that swings to the right.

But damn, it seems like half our Republican judges swing left after being appointed to SCOTUS.

---

Not just judges... Every Democrat in the Senate and House 99 percent of time always votes the same... They are locked step in destroying America but republicans fold when it comes to saving America... What can we do...? Yeah we vote them out but they do the exact same thing no matter who we vote into office... Its Crazy!!

quote:

---

Like I said in another post, the dems do not need to "pack" the court.

---

Correct

More often than not, they have 5.

The only one I can think of is Fetterman.

quote:

---

What’s interesting is, I don’t ever recall seeing a Dem/Marxist nominated judge that swings to the right.

But damn, it seems like half our Republican judges swing left after being appointed to SCOTUS.

---

What I find disgusting is when the SCOTUS gives a favorable ruling to the Democratic Socialist all you hear from the Gaslight Media is the SCOTUS just saved Democracy. When the SCOTUS gives a ruling that slows the purposeful destruction of the US the Gaslight Media is screaming the ruling is a threat to Democracy!!!