• Trending Topics:    
  • 2024 Election
  • Joe Biden
  • Donald Trump
  • Congress
  • Faith
  • Sports
  • Immigration
IJR
  • Politics
  • US News
  • Commentary
  • World News
  • Faith
  • Latest Headlines
No Result
View All Result
  • Politics
  • US News
  • Commentary
  • World News
  • Faith
  • Latest Headlines
No Result
View All Result
IJR
No Result
View All Result
Home IJR

Nadler Claims Dems Are ‘Not Packing’ the Supreme Court but Rather ‘Unpacking’ It

Madison Summers by Madison Summers
April 15, 2021 at 1:09 pm
in IJR
240 12
17
Nadler Claims Dems Are ‘Not Packing’ the Supreme Court but Rather ‘Unpacking’ It
491
SHARES
1.4k
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

A group of Congressional Democrats is looking to expand the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 — despite House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) clear signal that she will not bring the bill up for a vote.

“We’re not packing the Supreme Court, we’re unpacking it,” House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said on Thursday.

Nadler and Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) are leading a group of Democrats in unveiling a bill to expand the Supreme Court by four justices. It aims to break the 6-3 conservative majority currently on the court.

“As our country has grown, so too should the Supreme Court,” Nadler said. “Thirteen justices for 13 circuits is a logical progression … and to rectify the great injustice that was done in packing the court.”

There have been nine justices on the Supreme Court since 1869.

Court-packing is defined as “the act or practice of packing … a court and especially the United States Supreme Court by increasing the number of judges or justices in an attempt to change the ideological makeup of the court,” as Merriam-Webster defines it.

Watch Nadler’s comments below:

Rep. Nadler on his bill to expand the Supreme Court: "As our country has grown, so should the Supreme Court. 13 justices for 13 circuits is a logical progression…and to rectify the great injustice that was done in packing the court." https://t.co/Z1gC6BePs8 pic.twitter.com/sb0gJGEFMA

— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) April 15, 2021

When asked if she would commit to bringing the bill to the floor for a vote, Pelosi told reporters during Thursday’s press conference, “No,” as IJR reported on.

“I support the president’s commission to study such a proposal. But frankly, I’m not… Right now, we’re back, our members, our committees are putting together the infrastructure bill and the rest,” she added.

The speaker continued, “I don’t know that that’s a good idea or a bad idea. I think it’s an idea that should be considered, and I think the president’s taking the right approach to have a commission study such a thing. It’s a big step.”

President Joe Biden shared last week that he is creating a bipartisan commission to study Supreme Court reforms. Potential reforms includes increasing the number of Supreme Court justices.

“The Commission’s purpose is to provide an analysis of the principal arguments in the contemporary public debate for and against Supreme Court reform,” the White House statement said.

Biden said in October 2020 that he is “not a fan” of court-packing, but, at the time, it depended on how the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court was handled. She was confirmed 30 days after former President Donald Trump nominated her.

Tags: Jerry NadlerSupreme Court
[firefly_poll]

Join Over 6M Subscribers

We’re organizing an online community to elevate trusted voices on all sides so that you can be fully informed.





  • About Us
  • GDPR Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Editorial Standards & Corrections Policy
  • Subscribe to IJR

© 2025 JNews - Premium WordPress news & magazine theme by Jegtheme.

No Result
View All Result
  • Politics
  • US News
  • Commentary
  • World News
  • Faith
  • Latest Headlines

© 2025 JNews - Premium WordPress news & magazine theme by Jegtheme.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In

Thanks for reading IJR

Create your free account or log in to continue reading

Please enter a valid email
Forgot password?

By providing your information, you are entitled to Independent Journal Review`s email news updates free of charge. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and newsletter email usage