Out of whack. Back in 1983 as a senator, biden, well, feelings were quite different. President roosevelt clearly had the right to send to the united States Senate and congress a proposal to pack the court. It was totally within his right to do that. He violated no law, he was legalistically correct, but it was a bonehead idea. It was a terrible, terrible mistake to make. Harris of course the dates have changed. Top republicans say democrats are now only concerned with one thing on this day, power. The left wants a sword dangling over the justices when they weigh the facts in every case. As the democratic leader threatened they want justices to know theyll pay the price for rulings that democrats dont like. This just goes to show how far the Democrat Party has moved. There almost are no longer Common Sense or moderate democrats elected. Even Joe Biden in the past was opposed to this. Those democrats on the Supreme Court were opposed to this. What this simply does, its about control. It is overtaking a branch of government simply to have your control over a nation. Dana Jackie Heinrich is following the story outside the Supreme Court. We have a lot of things breaking. The House Speaker coming up. So much ahead of that News Conference. Catch us up on what this would mean. A lot happening, harris. House and senate democrats plan to unveil this legislation here at the Supreme Court in about a half an hour. I plan to ask how Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler sponsoring this bill whether it has the backing of democratic leadership. Without that and Filibuster Reform it wouldnt have a serious shot of passing. Chuck schumer is asking his caucus to ramp up conversations with the gop to find common ground on other issues. The expectation is that wont go far. More democrats will be willing to reform the filibuster that could give this an avenue. It would bring the total number of justices to 13. One of the sponsors jones tells fox the Majority Doctrine is clear. If the law suppresses the right to vote, if a law protects the right to vote especially for black and brown voters it is unconstitutional. The american people have had enough to restore Power To The People we must expand the Supreme Court. But republicans are lining up against it. The things the Biden Add Min is wants to do on Executive Orders on gun, illegal immigration, things they try to get through the House Hr1 that violates the constitution. They know their one Stopping Point to getting all this stuff done is the u. S. Supreme court. Theyll change the rules. Battle lines have been drawn amid Democrat Efforts to redefine infrastructure and what constituents bipartisanship. Jim jordan does expanding the Supreme Court count as infrastructure too . Jones replied yes with a heart. Not clear how president biden feels about this effort. The White House had no comment but just last week the President Sent out a commission to study the effects of reforming the Supreme Court. They are expected to get those answers within six months from now. Were waiting on that. Harris. Harris jackie, Thank You very much. I want to bring in Bret Homan a former u. S. Attorney in utah. Good to have you on the program today. An important day. Under former President Trump we saw three justices added. In a different scenario, though, the fact that democrats are now willing to pack the court before the President S commission on the matter is even turned its reporting in, what does that tell you . What it says is there really is no leadership on the Democrat Side in washington, d. C. Right now. This is not something even biden 10 years ago that was even considered an appropriate move by either party. There was leadership that warned each party against these kind of measures that really politicized the court. We dont hear that now. Instead even after announcing the commission that was supposed to study we see thats more theater. When a bill a week later is going to come out to add four justices to the Supreme Court. Harris i dont want to do anything but ask the questions ahead of this News Conference. We cant reach any conclusions yet but until they all speak on this bill. But if you just look at it. It smacks a little bit of Back And Forth. I dont want to say the Word Retaliation but how would you describe it. President trump chose three justices but it was in the realm of the united states. This puts it in a whole new realm. It makes the court now a direct political body. And why i say that and why its different, you highlighted this. Its one thing when a sitting president , you know, is duly authorized to appoint because of a vacancy a new justice to the Supreme Court. Both sides weigh in and you can see the results when that happens. You see that justice roberts, for example, does not always make conservatives happy and times when ginsberg made reasoned decisions that surprised some on the left. And so you saw a much more methodical attached to the Rule Of Law approach. Here this is simply an attempt to switch the majority of the court, which is 63 right now in terms of which President S have been able to appoint. This is very different. This is different than a vacancy and different than the Back And Forth that weve seen over decades. Harris i want to take a look back because these things matter as both a candidate more recently than that we saw a question that really dogged, if you will, Joe Biden. At first he didnt want to answer it. He wasnt sure how to answer it. Look back at the multiple times Joe Biden addressed this issue in recent years. I would not get into Court Packing. We have three justices, next time around we lose control they have three justices. We begin to lose any credibility the court has at all. My opinion Court Packing when the election is over. Im not a fan. You are open to expanding the court . Im opening to considering what happens from that point on. The last thing we need to do is turn the Supreme Court into just a political football. Whoever has the most votes gets whatever they want. President s come and go. Supreme court justices stay for generations. Harris that seems so important what Joe Biden was saying back then. Why do you think now he doesnt say that anymore, or did he just never mean it . I think, harris, this is the defining moment of this president. Why i say that is certainly he indicated and said he would put his whole soul into unifying this country. So given what he has previously said and now knowing the landscape this country is deeply divided. We need the kind of leadership, this is the defining moment. Im pessimistic. What you see so far in his administration is not a check of Reason And Balance in the White House to the agenda of those on the far left. So i guess well see. And what is at stake is our democracy. And i guess thats what makes all of us concerned about whether that leadership is there in the White House. Harris boy, what i hear you saying, brett, when you tinker with something as grand in our democracy, our republic as the u. S. Supreme court, it really does shift everything. And thats maybe a warning from you just last Week Justice Steven breyer had another warning about altering the High Court. Lets watch. The court is guided by legal principles, not politics. Structural alteration motivated by perception of political influence can only be further eroding that trust. Harris warning, red flags. What happens if this bill were to become law . What you would see then is expectations of the court in line with the lefts agenda. And look, both sides, conservatives, liberals are entitled to fight hard and to fight fair. What we cant have a stacking the deck. Both sides have attempted to do this in some way. Now, though, this is an entirely different ballgame. This is the stakes are as high as they can get. I think there are people on both sides are trying to scream and hit the Alarm Bells and wake up the country. But whether that will happen, we dont know. What we see is a congress that has been filled with power now that they maintain both sides and dont seem to have anybody on the left saying hey, maybe we should slow down and maybe we should consider the divide in this country. Harris youll stand by with me, please. Were taking a live look outside the u. S. Supreme court. Moments from now they will announce this bill. Ahead of that the speaker of the house is speaking. How you approach the jobs plan. Multiple bills, have any of those decisions been made yet . How are you looking at that . Right now were waiting for guidance from the senate as to what that actually means. As i said to you before i dont get involved in their rules and they dont get involved in our rules. However, for us to proceed, we just need to know what how we meet the needs of the american peoples. Goals and needs are. We prioritize that spending. How it will fit i hope it wouldnt need a Reconciliation Bill but well be ready if it does. You have smaller majority to work with now, too. Does it make it easier for you to split this package up into more pieces or im not frankly, The Process Will the policy will determine the process. The process will not determine the policy. So when we go forward with what dana all right. The speaker of the house moved off that topic with the u. S. Supreme court. Perhaps she doesnt want to step on that. She will wait to see what guidelines or suggestions they make. She moved off that topic very quickly. I want to bring in brett again. My question, brett. The american people will look at this and say okay, well, the former president as you said by authority that he had chose three justices the way that its always worked in america. Now democrats want to shift it and give themselves in the short term an advantage to choose four justices. What does that mean to the american people . They look at this and say how will daily Life Change . Which issues do you think immediately do you see them try to touch the dems if they get those four justices and expand the u. S. Supreme court . You are going to see all of the issues that both sides have been fighting over for many years. The second amendment and do they not only weaken it but do they have an ability to basically strip some of those rights from the constitution . And they do through those rulings. Then you think about abortion, you think about healthcare. There is really no issue that Isnt Hasnt been a hot Bed Issue of discussion for decades in this country that they cannot touch. Harris brett, were about to be joined by guy lewis. I want to bring him into our conversation as we get closer and closer to this News Conference, former u. S. Attorney. Great to have you both. Guy, this is one of those things that we can be calm about in certain circles i suppose, but there are a lot of people who are sweating over this. And you dont have to be living inside the beltway from what brett was saying. There are issues perhaps that democrats would like to jump in on. You are 100 right. Although i will be one of those that actually rings the bell. This idea is so bad I Cant begin to tell you how destructive it could be for the process. And without regard to the substance, the actual issues that come before the court. Think about this. You put it is hard enough to get a consensus and to get collegiality when you put nine people in a room. Think about if its 13, how that dynamic is going to occur. Look, weve thought about this, harris, back in the 30s when roosevelt was trying. He was very frustrated that the new Deal Legislation Wasnt getting through congress for various reasons. Legal reasons. And he proposed it. It was a Bad Idea, Bad Idea then. It is an worse idea now. Harris i want to get to this, my team has just popped this into view for me. Jones, democrat from new york, just released a video on his Twitter Page and it is getting immediate fire of attention. Here is part of it. Watch. Our democracy is in crisis. The insurrection on January 6th made that clear. This crisis didnt arrive overnight or by accident. The Supreme Court helped bring us here. In fact, the court has been actively dismantling our democracy for years. It invited a torrent of dark money to flood our electoral process. Set the stage for billionaires and special interests in politics. It gutted the protections of the voting Rights Act and paved the way for a new era of racist Voter Suppression. Harris so if you ever had a thought or a doubt that this has not become political that is a political ad, brett. Those are flat lies, harris. And the most important lie is the lie of omission. The Supreme Court you saw the rulings that they made or refused to even address when it came to some of the challenges. Election. They actually stood up to the Rule Of Law, made their decisions based on what they thought was right and wrong in terms of what they could hear or not hear. Thats because you had a deliberation between nine justices who very much care about avoiding the politics of the day. This is a message that the Supreme Court is actually responsible for some of the riots and actions in the capital as well as the divide in this country. I think that couldnt have been a statement more offensive. It will carry the day with some voters, some people in this country. They will listen to that. Thats the danger of poll it sidesing the Supreme Court. Harris i have to say this quickly with you, guy. What is egregious about what we just saw in a sense to blame the u. S. Supreme court for what happened on January 6th, what about all those cases being adjudicated right now against the people who showed up and carried out criminals acts . Does that wipe away their personal accountability . You know, harris, i agree with brett 100 on this. It is outrageous, frankly, a Congress Person would go on twitter, Go On Air and make these kind of claims. To lay the January 6th riots at the feet of the united states Supreme Court . Look, you want to go after trump, fine. He made a speech before but the Supreme Court and say they are somehow complicit, that they aided and abetted and caused the riots . Its ridiculous. It is laughable except for the fact that it is so dangerous. Look, you have the court there, they are trying to follow the law. The law that congress passes. The law that congress passes. And then they make decisions based on the law and the constitution and politicizing the court like this is exactly where we dont want to go. It is not going to help anything. Harris go right ahead. Think about the logic of that ad. The logic is the Supreme Court has been very political and engaged in politics and ruined part of the election and the country so lets make them more political. Harris wow. All right, like i said we may see ourselves inch our way closer to that as they talk about expanding the court. Senate and house democrats talking about a bill that they want to push forward. Thats happening moments from now and well carry it live. You have to see this moment in history for yourself. You will see it on screen, democrats about to hold that News Conference. Announcing their plan to pack the u. S. Supreme court. Well take you there live. Talk about how republicans plan to try to stop this motion from happening. Stay close. Theyve been wanting to do it for a long time. No problem with the courts until a republican president was elected and started appointing people to vacancies. Now there is a problem with the court. Refiplus from newday usa. With Mortgage Rates low and home values high refiplus can help you lower your rate plus turn your Home Equity into an average of 50,000. Money for security today. Money for retirement tomorrow. Refiplus from newday usa. Still lots of room. Just more to view. Still the big move. Just more moving. Still singing. Just more in tune. Still hard to find a spot. Just easier to park. Still the gangs all here. Just less are we there yet . the Chevy Family of suvs. Making Lifes Journey just better. Start your day with secret. Secret stops Sweat 3x more than ordinary antiperspirants. Making Lifes Journey just better. The new Provitamin B5 Formula is gentle on skin. With secret, outlast anything no sweat. Secret [announcer] meet the Ninja Foodi Air fry oven. Make familysized meals fast. And because its a ninja foodi, it can do things no other oven can, like flip away. The Ninja Foodi Air fry oven, the oven that crisps and flips away. Ok everyone, our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy. Whoohoo great tasting ensure with 9 grams of protein, 27 vitamins and minerals, and nutrients to support immune health. Im erin. And im margo. And nutrients to weve always done things our own way. Charted our own paths. I wasnt going to just back down from moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis. Psoriatic Arthritis Wasnt going to change who i am. When i learned that my Joint Pain could mean permanent joint damage, i asked about enbrel. Enbrel helps relieve Joint Pain, and helps stop permanent joint damage. Plus enbrel helps skin get clearer in psoriatic arthritis. Ask your doctor about enbrel, so you can get back to your true self. Play Ball Enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. Serious, sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, nervous System And Blood disorders and allergic reactions have occurred. Tell your doctor if youve been someplace where fungal infections are common. Or if youre prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if you have persistent fever, bruising, bleeding or paleness. Dont start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. Visit enbrel. Com to see how your joint damage could progress. Enbrel. Eligible patients may pay as little as 5 per month. Keeping your Oysters Business growing has you swamped. You need to hire. I need indeed indeed you do. The moment you sponsor a job on indeed you get a shortlist of quality candidates from a Resume Data Base claim your seventyfivedollar credit when you post your first job at indeed. Com promo not everybody wants the same thing. Thats why i go with Liberty Mutual they customize my Car Insurance so i only pay for what i need. cause i do things a little differently. Hey, ill take one, please wait, this isnt a Hotdog Stand . No, cant you see the sign . Wet. Teddy. Bears. Get ya wet Teddy Bears onehundred percent wet, guaranteed or the next one is on me only pay for what you need. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. Harris a live look now as news is breaking, the u. S. Supreme Court Right outside you see the big sign that says expand the court. That is because democrats are about to unveil their legislation to pack that Supreme Court bench potentially giving president biden an additional four seats to fill on the u. S. Supreme court. House republicans are countering that move with a proposed constitutional amendment to try to keep the court at nine justices. One of the Sponsors Congressman Mike Gallagher says, quote, the Supreme Court has been comprised of nine justice is for more than 150 years and it is time we amend the constitution to make this longstanding precedent permanent before it is too late. It is a very dangerous idea in my opinion. I think it would further tear the country apart, end quote. Joining me now another sponsor of that very amendment, republican congressman from colorado Ken Buck. He is a member of the House Judiciary and foreign affairs committees. Congressman buck, Thank You for being with me. This seems like such a critical time in history and it is just the bill. But why is it so important today . Why is this such a huge first step for democrats . Well, it is a clear Power Play right now. What the democrats are finding is they cant get their unpopular agenda through congress. And they are trying to change the Voting Laws and federalize voting. They are trying to change the Gun Rights Laws that have been left up to the states. They are trying so many new things. We are arguing last night in Judiciary Committee over a reparations bill. They are trying so many things that are unpopular and know will not get through the united States Security Supreme Court so they need to pack the court to get there. This is throwing gasoline on the fire. Harris im curious about that. So how difficult is it for far left Leaning Democrat Agenda to get pushed through when democrats have a bikam ral majority . People like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema of West Virginia and Arizona Arent really there . Is there a split in the party that makes it a desperate move to go after the u. S. Supreme Court Court . I think it is. They couldnt get a bill through congress that Nancy Pelosi was pushing. That was to override the election in iowa. They couldnt get all the democrats on board to get a Democrat Majority in the house. So i think that their agenda is so left wing it is even unpopular with moderate democrats who dont want to risk their political future to support what aoc and the squad are trying to push on americans. Harris im looking at the short list i made. You have a longer list. You are much more astute at this than i would be as a Reporter But Top of my list right now because of whats going on in the nation would they dare to touch policing at the u. S. Supreme Court Level . Could we see Discussions Of Defund the police at that level if democrats grab this power and put four more justices on that court . Defunding the police is a really interesting issue for the left. When it comes to protecting them, they put up fences around the capitol. They bring in the national guard, they have polices courts wherever they go. When it comes to americans, they start talking about defunding the police as a way of getting their base excited. I dont think you will see anything in the defunding Police Area that will get through either the House Or Senate because it is so darn unpopular with the american people. Harris congressman buck, i look back. Of course, you have a president , President Trump, who under his watch he had three vacancies and filled them. Kavanaugh, gorsuch, barrett. Thats the way it was for 150 years. The Game Change Biden would potentially get four just is and could do what he wants. He would have the different type of authority the way i understand it. To further that judicial appointments by the president. Donald trump 245 judges. Under barack obama, george w. Bush across two terms each of them over 300. But Donald Trump did more in four years than either of them. Talk to me about where we are judicially in the united states and how a grab like this could touch that part of our court system. What happened was Harry Reid did away with the filibuster for judicial appointments. As a result of that, it happened at The End of the obama administration. The result of that was it gave Mitch Mcconnell and President Trump more Authority And Flexibility to move judges and justices. And what weve seen is more and more judges getting confirmed more quickly as a result of that move by Harry Reid. Now that the filibuster is gone for judges and justices they want to pack the Supreme Court. They want four justices to make sure they have a majority. If they were expanding by two they may still not get the votes they want. They have chosen the number four. The result of that would be in the future if republicans get the House And Senate and White House, republicans would then expand it. You will see a neverending expansion of the Supreme Court unless this constitutional amendment is passed. Harris are you concerned that we go from less Supreme Court to the u. S. Mundane court and just becomes about politics . What really concerns me is the last branch of the federal government that is viewed as somewhat apolitical. It is viewed as somewhat fair. It is viewed as somewhat fact based is the Supreme Court. And i say that as an opponent of the Roe Versus Wade decisions and other decisions but at least they have the credibility of trying to stay above the political fray. If this happens they will just be another Super Legislature and really the american people will have nothing to rely on. Harris congressman Ken Buck of the great state of colorado. Thank you for being with me today. An important day. Great to have your time and expertise. Thank you, harris. Harris i want to bring back now brett Pullman And Guy lewis. You heard the congressman there. Guy, first your thoughts this fight to try to protect the way the u. S. Supreme court is staffed now, staffed for lack of a better word. It only has nine justices. Republicans are trying to keep it that way. What are your thoughts for the fight for them ahead . Great question. Lets go back a little bit and look at the fight that occurred amongst the founding fathers. They are very smart people and thought about this, harris. They tried to figure out ways to make the court apolitical, nonpolitical. They wanted justices, for example, appointed for life. They wanted a president to be able to appoint the justice and then require the senate to confirm that justice before she or he went on the court. They thought through these ideas. They did everything they could to make the court apolitical. So that we would have three branches of government. Two that were clearly political and we can all agree on that, and one that should be apolitical. Frankly, thats what it has been for the most part. And ideas like this to pack it with four additional justices, which would give them the majority. They are not pulling four out of the air, harris, for sure. Biden and his group if i get four through then the six that are they consider to be the conservative. People can argue with that. Justice roberts often votes with the liberal side. But if you follow their logic, you might as well just disregard the minority and forget about the court and lets put a bunch of politician necessary there to make decisions as judges. Harris oh my gosh. When you look at the Approval Rating sometimes as low as single digits in the recent years people dont want that. People dont want a bunch of lawmakers running it. They dont. They dont like the ones on Capitol Hill now if you look at the polling. Here is a question that i would ask. Today at this News Conference if i were there. Im sure they will get into this, but can you even think about doing this without putting in a Term Limit . Because that means that if democrats put four justices on now and it becomes a 76. If you add four to the liberal side based on the President S who chose them. Not necessarily their own politics. You will have 76. Who knows how long that can sit, right . Were seeing people walk up. The minute this News Conference starts ill stop talking. Your thought on that. It puts up in the air every protection and intended construct of our system of government. And so if you are willing to increase the number of justices to get a political edge, then you will do anything. Harris forgive me. Senator marquee has started as the democrats unveil their Court Packing bill. Jerry nadler, chair of the Judiciary Subcommittee on the courts inelectric toou all property and the Internet Hank Johnson and congressman jones, the Vice Chair of the subcommittee on the courts Intellectual Property an the interact. Thank you to the activists and leaders here today. Well hear from Meghan Hatcher mays. Chris kang, the cofounder of demand justice, and Professor Aaron Bell ken, director of take back the court. So we are here as a coalition beginning this effort to insure that we restore justice to the Supreme Court. This is an incredible moment as we introduce the Judiciary Act of 2021. We are here today because the united states Supreme Court is broken. It is out of balance and it needs to be fixed. Too many americans view our highest court in the land as a partisan political institution, not an impartial judicial branch of government. Too many americans have lost faith in the court as a neutral arbiter of the most important constitutional and legal questions that arise in our judicial system. Im disappointed to say that too many americans question the courts legitimacy. The consequence is the rights of all americans but especially people of color, women, and our Immigrant Communities are at risk. The concerns the american people have about the High Court are legitimate and they are well founded. The court is broken. And make no mistake about it, the court is broken because leader Mitch Mcconnell, his senate republican colleagues and Donald Trump broke it. They violated historic norms governing Supreme Court appointments. They created a precedent that the senate would not confirm a justice to the Supreme Court during a president ial year, refusing to give now attorney general Merrick Garland a hearing and a vote. They held the Seat Open for months and months and then allowed Donald Trump to appoint neil gorsuch. They claimed that the proximity to a president ial election meant the seat had to be held open until the people through their votes for president could decide who should fill it. Senator mcconnell even wrote that because we were, quote, in the midst of a president ial election process, we believe that the american people should seize the opportunity to weigh in on whom they trust to nominate the next person for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. Yet four years later, just days before the 2020 president ial election, even while americans were casting ballots, Leader Mcconnell and his republican colleagues confirmed Amy Comey Barrett to the court to fill the seat held by the late, great Justice Ruth Bader ginsberg. So much for letting the people weigh in. As a result we have a 63 conservative majority on the court that has caused this crisis of confidence in our country. The republicans stole two seats on the Supreme Court and now it is up to us to repair that damage. Our democracy is in Jep Or Dee today because the Supreme Court standing is sorely damaged. The way we repair it is straight forward. We undo the damage that the republicans have done by restoring balance. And we do it by adding four seats to the court to create a 13member Supreme Court. These four new seats to be filled by president biden will reconstitute the united states Supreme Court. The bench will then rightly reflect the values of the majority of the american people on whose behalf they serve. Expanding the court is constitutional. Congress has done it before and congress must do it again. We must expand the court and we must abolish the filibuster to do it. The words etched above the main entrance of the Supreme Court building behind us express the ultimate responsibility of the court. Equal justice under the law. But how will there be equal justice when seats on the courts have been stolen . How will it be equal justice when republicans have warped and weaponized the highest court of the land for their gain. They think equal justice means justice for their purposes, their values, their causes. That is not equal justice. That is not the sacred duty of the Supreme Court. Expanding the Supreme Court rights the wrongs the republicans have done to this great court. Expanding the Supreme Court is equal justice and will insure equal justice is dispensed to all americans. So now let me turn and recognize the great chairman of the House Judiciary committee, jerrold nadler. Thank you very much, senator. First i want to thank my friends and Colleagues Court Subcommittee chairman Hank Johnson, Senator Markey and Representative Jones for their leadership in introducing this bill and acknowledge the work of the broad coalition of Public Interest groups supporting the bill and educating the public about important reform. One by historical standards is long overdue. Everything Senator Markey said about maneuvers of Senator Mcconnell and the republicans delegit mazeing the Supreme Court is obviously true. There is no justification, there can be no justification for what they did and how can americans look at the Supreme Court and expect it to do justice, to do equal justice when it has been so severely politically manipulated . Some people will say the Supreme Court has always been nine members. It hasnt. There is nothing new about changing the size of the Supreme Court. The constitution leaves the number of justices up to Congress And Congress has changed that number seven times in the history of the country. Our founders understood that as a country and the judicial system evolve the court needs to evolve with it. This legislation represents a muchneeded next step in that evolution. Many people think about the Supreme Court in terms of its individual members and they are right to do so but it is also the fact that in addition to what we were referring to a few minutes ago in terms of the legitimacy of the court, the efficiency of the court is another question. Nine justices may have made sense in the 19th century when there were only nine circuits. Only a few hundred appeals were filed before the court every year and so many of our most important Laws Everything from civil rights to antitrust, internet, financial regulation, healthcare, regulation and White Collar Crime did not exist as far as the court was concerned and didnt require Ajudd Indication by the Supreme Court. The justification for 9 is weaker today. Thousands of cases filed before the court each year and statutes and regulations that make our Society And Economy work. Thats why unlike most of our history the Supreme Court accepts cases in a tiny fraction of cases. That means that most cases, the vast majority of cases, the overwhelming majority of cases dont get considered by the Supreme Court which they are entitleed to do and throughout much of our history did. Our predecessors made sense when they pegged the size of the Supreme Court to the number of judicial circuits. As our country has grown so should the Supreme Court. 13 justices for 13 circuits is a logical progression and another reason why im glad to join my colleagues in introducing the Judiciary Act of 2021 to establish the Supreme Court size as 13. Its a nice number. It is not a nice number. It is a proper number that matches the number of circuits as it has historically and it also will enable us to do justice and to rectify the great injustice done in packing the court. Some people will say were packing the court. Were unpacking it. Senator mcconnell and republicans packed the court over the last couple of years as Senator Markey outlined. This is a reaction to that. It is a necessary step in the evolution of the court, and im glad and proud to cosponsor it. Now let me introduce our one of our coSponsors Congressman Hank Johnson one of the authors of this legislation. Thank you, Chairman Nadler and Thank You for your leadership on this issue. Senator markey, Representative Jones. Congressman Hank Johnson, and i have the privilege of chairing the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee On Courts Intellectual Property and the internet. As a criminal Defense Lawyer for 27 years and a Magistrate Court Judge for 12 of those years, prior to coming to congress, 27 years as a criminal Defense Lawyer, i have a great deal of respect for the judicial branch, the third coequal branch of government. And the independence of the court is critical. Most folks assume that the constitution mandates the number of justices on the Supreme Court must be nine. But nowhere in the constitution is it written just how many justices should sit on the Supreme Court. I would submit that the reason why the framers did not enumerate how large the court should be is because they envisioned the legislative branch would need to have flexibility in The Ending to the courts operations from time to time. So the constitution does not require that there be a nine justices sitting on the Supreme Court. The fact is that congress has changed the size of the Supreme Court seven times over the course of the nations history. The first time, in fact, only 13 years after the constitution was ratified when the President And Congress were still governed by our countrys founding generation. The real outlier is the fact that the Court Hasnt changed while the rest of the federal government has grown, Keeping Pace with the growth of the nation. Many of the earlier changes in the number of justices were made specifically in response to national growth. In 1807, for example, a seventh Circuit Court of appeals was added when kentucky, Tennessee And Ohio were added to the union and a new justice was added to the Supreme Court bringing the total number of justices to seven. But this natural expansion stopped after the Civil War leaving us today with the historical oddity of 13 Circuit Courts of appeal and only 9 justices. I believe its time to go back to this tradition and have at least 13 justices. With 13 justices, each justice would be able to have responsibility for Emergency Applications for a single circuit instead of the current Status Quo where one justice covers three circuits, two justices cover two, and the remaining six justices cover one. We recently held a hearing on this docket what some have called the Supreme Court Shadow Docket because of the courts recent tendency to issue orders on that docket that have enormous impact but which in stark contrast to normal practice might not be accompanied by an opinion explaining the Courts Reasoning, even if some justices dissent. Im hopeful that by spreading this work out among more justices there will be more capacity to appropriately deal with emergencies, including explaining the Courts Reasoning in important cases bringing Transparency And Light to this increasingly important part of the Supreme Courts practice is necessary. Im also hopeful that additional justices will allow the Supreme Court to hear more cases in a given term. There is an enormous disparity in the number of cases heard by the courts of appeal and the Supreme Court. In 2019 the courts of appeals decided more than 50,000 appeals. In contrast, the Supreme Court has decided fewer than 100 cases in recent terms. In 100 cases, 100 cases decided as a percentage of 50,000 cases dealt with by the courts of appeals is a pal try. 02 . Getting a case in front of the Supreme Court starts to resemble winning the lottery for anyone without connections. The scarcity has led to a Cottage Industry where litigants who can afford to do so spend enormous time, Energy And Money in rallying others to file friend of court briefs, amicus briefs, to urge the Supreme Court to agree to hear a case. I have serious concerns, ladies and gentlemen, about whether a twoteared Justice System has developed, one reserved for marquee cases, White Shoe Lawyers and wealthy litigants, and one for everyone else. In sum its time we start thinking about the Supreme Court like we think about the rest of the federal government and consider whether and how its current composition allows it to effectively do what we need it to do, which is to efficiently and effectively administer justice and uphold the Rule Of Law. Im pleased to join my colleagues Senator Markey, Chairman Nadler and Representative Jones in taking an important step in that Direction Today with the introduction of the Judiciary Act of 2021 which im proud to sponsor. Now im happy to turn the podium over to my colleague and Vice Chair of the subcommittee On Courts Intellectual Property and the Internet Representative jones from new york. Thank you mr. Chairman, mr. Chairman for your leadership and my friend, Senator Markey was not on this and many other important issues with great political courage and understanding the needs of the american people. I wish we did not have to stand here today, i wish we didnt have a far right Supreme Court majority that is hostile to democracy itself but here we are. And the fact is, if we want to save our democracy, we must act before it is too late by restoring balance of the Supreme Court. Our democracy faces its greatest test since jim crow. From the insurrection of the capital to the racist Voter Suppression all throughout the united states of america, the far right is at war with our democracy. What i want people to understand is that this crisis did not arrive overnight, rather, the Supreme Court has been an accomplice. In fact, the Supreme Court, specifically the Roberts Court has been working to dismantle our democracy for years. One decision at a time, the right Wing Majority on the Supreme Court has unraveled the greatest achievements of the civil rights movement, to produce a government that does not look like, understand, or even pretend to represent the american people. Every time we needed the Roberts Court to stand up for government by the people, the court shows government by the power. And its citizens united decision in the year 2010 it opened the floodgates to a torrent of dark corporate money in our elections. Years later, three years later, in fact, the Roberts Court got it at the Crown Jewel of the voting Rights Act which set the stage for what we are now seeing in georgia and other racist attempts to suppress the right of americans to vote in this country. Of course, more recently in 2019 a decision, the Supreme Court, specifically the Roberts Court gave a green light to partisan gerrymandering, further entrenching Minority Rule. Shamefully, the Roberts Court has never struck down a single Voter Suppression law as unconstitutional, not a single one. Decisions like these have created a path for the far right to remain in power despite being roundly and repeatedly rejected by the american people. It is simply a fact that republican president ial candidates have lost the Popular Vote in seven of the last eight president ial elections. Yet only four of the last 19 Supreme Court justices have been appointed by democratic President S. So lets be clear, the far right did whatever it could to capture the court, they invented a nonexistent rule to hold open Merrick Garlands seat for 14 months before confirming neil gorsuch. And they violated their own rule just four years later to confirm Amy Coney Barrett while an election was already underway, votes were already being tabulated, the far right will now do whatever it can to maintain its grip on power. Today, bolstered by the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett, this court will go further than any other in modern american history to rig our democracy in favor of the far right and the special interests that bankrolled them. In doing so, the far right majority will maintain Minority Rule for generations to come. That is, unless we stop them. In his parting words to this nation, the late congressman John Lewis said democracy is not a state. It is an act. And each generation must do its part. That is why today we are introducing the Judiciary Act of 2021. To act, to do our part, our bill is simple. It adds four justices to the u. S. Supreme court. When those seats are filled, we will finally have a court committed to government by the people. The constitution, for its part, is clear. When the Supreme Court will not respect the will of the people, congress has the power and the duty to expand the Supreme Court and in fact as you have heard today, congress has done it seven times before. Expanding the court is not about political parties. Justices John Paul Stevens and David Souter were republicans when they were a appointed by republican President S of the united states. They were committed to the Rule Of Law and have the right of everyone in this country to vote. Not so today. Court expansion is about saving our democracy. Expanding the court would restore our right to choose the world that we wish to live in. We can still have a democracy if we fight for it. And that is precisely what we are doing today through the introduction of this bill. Thank you. Questions . Yes, maam. Just minutes before you all came out here, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she has no plans on bringing this bill up to the floor so where exactly do you go from here . And were you disappointed by the speakers comments . My view is that we are in a historic situation where this court is a 63 quarts because of illegitimate actions taken by a republican united States Senate and republican president. The harm that that court is going to be able to do across a whole range of issues, voting rights, a womans right to choose, environmental issues, issue after issue are now in jeopardy. So my belief is that it is absolutely imperative that we introduce this legislation. Because its going to become clear as decision after decision emanates from the Supreme Court that there needs to be a historic balance which is restored and so we begin this debate, we begin this Discussion Today but it does not end here. I believe that ultimately its going to be very clear that this legislation has to pass. I will turn it over. I will agree. Speaker pelosi is a very good judge of events, sorry, Speaker Pelosi, i agree, Speaker Pelosi is a very good judge of events and of history and i believe that as events unfold on the court comes down with decisions destructive to a womans right to choose, as it comes down with decisions destructive to the climate, as they come down with decisions destructive of civil liberties, i believe that Speaker Pelosi and others will come along. Its my fault, we have three other speakers who i would like to come to the podium first and we will begin with the director of democracy policy. Thank you. Thats okay, Thank You, Senator Markey. Sorry, everybody, good morning, everyone. Thank you to Representative Jones, representative nadler, Senator Markey for their leadership on this bill