Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Supreme Court of the United States)
Democrats, when Ruth Ginsburg died and a seat opened up on the U.S. Supreme Court, threatened immediately that if President Trump nominated a replacement, and the Senate confirmed, they would "pack" the high court as soon as they could.
That would be to add any number of judges, selected for their liberal and progressive agendas, so that Democrats would get their way with court decisions.
However, a longtime liberal lawyer and commentator, Jonathan Turkey, warned that "would destroy" the high court. At least that's what Ginsburg believed.
Which makes it very important for the Democrat nominees in the presidential race, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, to make clear their plans, said Turley, since Ginsburg herself "expressly denounced" the idea.
"The refusal of Vice President Joe Biden to answer repeated questions about his position on the packing of the Supreme Court is deeply troubling," Turley wrote. "Voters should know if Biden would consider such an irresponsible act, particularly when he previously denounced it."
He said Biden, who previously opposed the concept, at this point "has chosen to remain silent."
He said the president and Senate, both in the situation four years ago where Barack Obama nominated Merrick Garland, and this year's situation in which President Trump nominated Amy Coney Barrett, are following the Constitution.
There was nothing unconstitutional about not voting on Garland, nor is there anything unconstitutional about voting on Barrett, he explained.
But, he said, "The packing scheme would change the court for the sole purpose of securing an ideological majority. It would create a new and fundamentally flawed court — a sad reflection of our age of rage."
Ginsburg, he said, noted, "If anything would make the court look partisan, it would be that—one side saying, 'When we’re in power, we’re going to enlarge the number of judges, so we would have more people who would vote the way we want them to.'"
In fact, Turley pointed out, Ginsburg had refused, decades ago during her confirmation, to state how she would rule on issues.
Turley said he's criticized that position because nominees are not required to talk about their basis for rights.
But he said what politicians today are demanding, "is a direct litmus test." And he pointed out previous Senates have not demanded statements endorsing, or opposing, certain cases.
And, he explained, that would be necessary for strategies such as the packing plan from Kamala Harris to work.
"Litmus tests and the idea to pack the bench would not honor Ginsburg. They would instead destroy the Supreme Court she loved. These moves would obliterate an institution that has over history preserved the stability and continuity of our country. The Supreme Court has performed this vital role based on its legitimacy and authority with Americans that will surely evaporate if Democrats conduct litmus tests or pack the bench," he warned.
The post Top law prof: Biden refusal to reveal court-packing plan 'deeply troubling' appeared first on WND.
