a plan where have you 15 justices. five appointed by democratic presidents. five by republican and then the other five they can only be seated by unanimous consent of the other 10? while more democrats are open to bakinger bench. our next guest thinks the supreme court should stick with nine justices and says history proves it. brian: not a surprise to know judge napolitano feels that way. he also hosts the liberty file on fox nation. judge, are you surprised we are in this conversation? yes, i am. we haven t had a conversation like this. we haven t had this conversation. steve: in our lifetimes. the country last had a conversation like this in 1937. this is offered by franklin delano roosevelt elected in 32, and re-elected in 36. when he offered this was so unpopular in 1937 the proposal was because the court had been invalidating legislation. everyone on the court 70 up to a maximum of 15.
independent who chose the first 10? brian: why don t we fill up the stadium with judges and make them all wear gowns and we will vote and make decisions. 35,000 against 27,000 therefore, the objection is sustained. steve: like a legislature. jedediah: how many is too many? who is going to pick the number and when election change hands and it goes democrats and republican, no i want 30. no, i think 40 is better. where does it end? steve: fdr tried to too it and that failed miserably. joe biden is currently leading in a bunch of polls, right? listen to what he said once upon a time about packs the court. president roosevelt clearly had the right to send to the united states senate and united states congress a proposal to pack the court. he was legalistically absolutely correct. but it was a bone head idea. it was a terrible, terrible mistake to make. and it put in question for