Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 16 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Why FDR Flopped in his SCOTUS Pack, and Why Biden Won't Try

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages)   No comments
Follow Me on Twitter     Message earl ofari hutchinson
Become a Fan
  (10 fans)

In a meeting in the spring, 1935 with his Attorney General, Homer Cummings, Franklin Roosevelt railed against the Supreme Court. Cummings was even more blunt, "They mean to destroy us, we will have to find a way to get rid of the present membership of the Supreme Court." FDR and Cummings were enraged that the conservative majority on the high court had repeatedly struck down key portions of his New Deal legislation. FDR needed no prodding from Cummings to act. He quickly announced he'd push to add six more justices to the SCOTUS.

The instant Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Trump announced that they'd bull ahead and steamroll through the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to replace the late SCOTUS justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the heat was on Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden once in the White House to do exactly what a frustrated and angered FDR tried to do with the SCOTUS; namely pack it.

Barrett's writings, rulings, opinions, and her far right evangelical rightist fringe group allegiance, marks her as a right idealogue every bit in the mold of Antonin Scalia. She is expected to almost certainly cement the fifth vote in an iron lock conservative majority. John Roberts to the bitter disappointment of rightist legal advocacy groups has failed to be that cemented fifth vote.

However, there are problems in pushing Biden to commit to pile more justices on the court. Start with Biden himself, he is not prepared to make that commitment. And each time he's been asked whether he will, he's demurred, been evasive, or silent. Biden almost certainly knows the history and dismal outcome of what happened when FDR tried it in 1937.

FDR was on firm ground in rightly citing that there is no legal or constitutional provision that limits the high court to nine justices. Congress at different times has put various numbers of justices as the court's complement. The court's conservative majority then was unabashed in their intent to gut or outright nullify major New Deal laws on labor, social security, unemployment, and the White House's regulatory powers. FDR proposed an amendment to rein in the courts power to throttle legislation. But that went nowhere. So, he proposed to add six new justices for every justice over age 70 that refused to retire. There were six of them, though not all conservative.

The backlash against FDR was titanic. The GOP, much of the media and the majority of Democrats led the charge. FDR was lambasted as a dictator, tyrant, and his move was called a naked power grab. The near universal consensus was that court packing would set a dangerous precedent.

Now, FDR had just won one of the greatest landslide reelection victories in the nation's history. His gargantuan popularity meant little, though, in garnering public support for his court expansion plan. He backed down and withdrew it.

FDR's flop is a cautionary note. The SCOTUS is top heavy tradition bound, massively revered, and has been firmly shielded by custom from any direct political interference. Throughout the nation's history, SCOTUS's have had every brand of ideology among its justices--liberal, moderate, conservative, and rigidly right idealogue.

But the court has also had a transitory quality to it. Judges eventually do come and go through age, health, and death. The court has had more than a few instances of individual judicial conversion as well as surprising departures from orthodoxy by judges on cases and decisions. Roberts being one example. When he voted not to scrap the Affordable Care Act, the right went ballistic and denounced him as a traitor.

There's one other factor to consider in any demand that Biden do a modern-day version of FDR court pack plan. That's the nation's changing political and social demographics. Voters are increasingly younger, more diverse, and more liberal. This almost certainly will translate into more robust Democratic party majorities in more state governments, Congress, and the White House. The old saw is that SCOTUS justices read the newspapers and watch cable news too. No matter how much conservatives may spout "originalist" notions of a frozen, unchangeable Constitution, they are not immune from the nation's changing trends and public opinion.

FDR witnessed that change. Several of the hard-nosed judges that made his legislative life miserable soon retired. He was able finally to appoint the type of judges that he wanted. The court also got the message that things were changing and became more compliant to FDR and for the most part kept hands off other legislative initiatives of his.

Biden need simply bide his time, learn from this history. He'll get the court that he wants. FDR did.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He is the author of In Scalia's Shadow: The Trump Supreme Court (Amazon). He is a weekly co-host of the Al Sharpton Show on Radio One. He is the host of the weekly Hutchinson Report on KPFK 90.7 FM Los Angeles and the Pacifica Network.

Rate It | View Ratings

Earl Ofari Hutchinson Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is a nationally acclaimed author and political analyst. He has authored ten books; his articles are published in newspapers and magazines nationally in the United States. Three of his books have been published in other (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The House is duty-bound to Bring Articles of Impeachment against Clarence Thomas

Think of the Two Decade Embarrassment of Thomas We Would Have Been Spared If We had known about Thomas's Porn Alleged Ob

Tea Party Now a Huge GOP Liability

The Awful Transformation of Bernie Sanders

Clarence Thomas Can Breathe a Sigh of Relief with Weiner Downfall

Did Race Explain Penn State's Blind Eye to Sex Scandal?

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend