H.J.Res. 28 was one sentence long. One. "The Supreme Court of the United States shall be composed of nine justices." That's the entire text of the Keep Nine Amendment that House Republicans brought to the floor for a vote this week.
Two hundred and five Democrats read that sentence and voted no. They want to pack the Supreme Court, they just put it in writing.
The final tally was 212-206 — short of the two-thirds majority required to send a constitutional amendment to the states. Fifteen members didn't vote. But the number that matters is the one Democrat who broke ranks: Rep. Don Davis of North Carolina. One out of 206. The rest of his party looked at a one-sentence promise to leave the Supreme Court alone and decided that was a bridge too far.
House Speaker Mike Johnson framed the vote as a chance for Democrats to "put their money where their mouth is." They did. Just not the way the phrase usually implies.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries had already tipped the play. Back in August, he told reporters that "dramatic" Supreme Court reform is "necessary" and that "there's a variety of different options that are on the table." He added that Democrats "can't foreclose any single one of them." The Keep Nine vote was the receipt.
Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon of Pennsylvania argued the amendment "would undermine our system of checks and balances" and called it a "grave mistake" to "permanently tie Congress' hands." Think about that framing for a second. Keeping the Court at the number it's held since 1869 — 157 years — is apparently the radical position now. Changing a century-and-a-half precedent to dilute a conservative majority? That's just good governance.
Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland accused Republicans of "court packing on steroids," which is an interesting way to describe an amendment that would literally prevent anyone from adding or removing seats. Raskin's argument is that confirming justices through the normal constitutional process counts as packing — a definition so creative it belongs in a graduate thesis, not a floor speech.
This wasn't a messaging vote on some obscure procedural question. This was a clean, binary, up-or-down question — should the Supreme Court stay at nine justices, yes or no? There was no spending bill attached, no poison pill, no procedural gimmick to hide behind. Just nine justices. Yes or no.
The last time court-packing had this much institutional support was 1937, when FDR tried to add six seats after the Court kept striking down New Deal programs. His own party killed the plan. Democrats in the Roosevelt era — not exactly a bunch of right-wingers — understood that breaking the Court's independence would break something that couldn't be repaired. Eighty-nine years later, their successors don't share that concern.
Jeffries says all options are on the table. Two hundred and five of his members just confirmed it — under oath, on the record, with a roll-call vote.
The amendment needed two-thirds. It got a bare majority. The math doesn't change. But the 212-206 margin tells you exactly where the Democratic Party stands on judicial independence, and Rep. Don Davis of North Carolina is standing there alone.
Comments are closed.