August 9, 2022

Harris says ‘conversation’ about court packing can’t be had without addressing Trump’s judicial appointments

Vice presidential hopeful Kamala Harris just decided to jump fully on board the brand-new Democrat narrative that re-defines “court-packing” as placing GOP judges in vacant federal and Supreme Court seats. 

Democrat nominee Joe Biden has refused to give an answer to anyone about his position on expanding the Supreme Court, but his running mate took it upon herself during a Thursday interview to intervene on his behalf.

Harris told CNN Tonight’s Don Lemon that Biden doesn’t want to commit to a position “because our opponents are trying to create a distraction.”

She quickly pivoted to the new party line on the concept of court-packing, accusing Donald Trump of being the real proponent of the controversial concept.

Harris explained:

Seriously, if we want to talk about court-packing, can we please talk about — and I’ve witnessed this firsthand on the Senate Judiciary Committee. They’ve been, one after another, nominating people who are unqualified, people who refuse to say that Brown v. Board of Education is precedent. Do you know that they put 50 people on the lifetime federal court of appeals and not one is black? I mean — I just — I’m sorry, but I can’t have a conversation about court-packing, around something that has not even happened yet, which is who is going to be the next president, without dealing with what they’ve been doing for the last few years.

There is no issue that the Democrats cannot link to race at this point, and Harris masterfully illustrates the left’s unwavering commitment to deflecting any criticism from themselves directly on to Donald Trump.

As Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) pointed out on Wednesday, there is a real definition to the phrase “packing the court,” not that Democrats would ever acknowledge it — that would not be politically expedient.

Until just over a week ago, the phrase has been used to describe the idea of “expanding the number of justices to achieve a political outcome” — typically in reference to the Supreme Court — in order to achieve a partisan majority to advance policy goals.

It does not mean “filling judicial vacancies,” Cruz added. Democrats know that they can’t stop Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, so in their desperation to score political points against the GOP, they’ll try to paint Republicans that work with Trump to fill court vacancies as the real transgressors.

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
0 0 votes
Article Rating

This is a demo advert, you can use simple text, HTML image or any Ad Service JavaScript code. If you're inserting HTML or JS code make sure editor is switched to 'Text' mode.

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Ekonomia Definicja (@guest_1213339)
1 year ago

Hi, An interesting discussion is worth comment. I think that you should write more on this topic, it might not be a taboo subject but generally people are not enough to speak on such topics. To the next. Cheers



Sign Up For The Daily Newsletter


Would love your thoughts, please comment.x