Court-Packers Say Court-Packing Is Not Court-Packing

The U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C. (Melpomenem/Getty Images)

A good sign that your argument is neither good nor popular is when you have to keep changing the long-accepted meaning of words. So it is with Bloomberg Law op-ed by law professors Tonja Jacobi and Matthew Sag titled “The Supreme Court Needs 15 Justices.” The op-ed’s subhed leads off: “Changing the law to allow 15 U.S. Supreme Court justices would not be court packing. It would allow the court to take many more cases and address some of the urgent issues that it currently neglects.” Bloomberg uses the same line in promoting the op-ed on Twitter:

To be fair to Jacobi

Articles You May Like

Sorry, Not Much Just Changed in New York and California
Revenge of the Laptop: DOJ Looking Into Hunter Biden, Firm, for Illegal Lobbying
MacKenzie Scott’s Politicized Philanthropy
Ted Cruz: Critical Race Theory ‘Is Every Bit as Racist as the Klansmen in White Sheets’
FBI director Wray testifies that he didn’t know Parler warned them about possible violence on Jan. 6

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *