Far-left reintroduces plan to hijack the Supreme Court to save abortion

far-left Supreme Court expansion abortion

Far-left extremists reintroduce plan to hijack the Supreme Court to save abortion

Far-left extremists in Congress have reintroduced legislation to hijack the Supreme Court in order to save abortion.

The legislation reintroduced a few days ago is in response to the SCOTUS ruling overturning Roe v. Wade (via TheHill.com):

“When a bully steals your lunch money in the schoolyard, you have to do something about it, or else the bully will come back over and over again. So, we’re in this fight, and we’re going to reclaim these seats. We’re not going to allow the bully to win,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) said at a press conference in front of the Supreme Court on Tuesday.

Markey and other Democrats previously introduced the legislation roughly two years ago to create a 13-justice Supreme Court, one for each of the nation’s appeals courts.

Their reintroduced proposal follows the court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and other major cases that moved the court to the right.

“Today, a 6-3, far-right supermajority on the United States Supreme Court threatens our rights, our democracy and our planet. To restore our democracy, we must expand the United States Supreme Court, and we must do so now. Republicans captured the court against the will of most Americans,” said Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.).

The two lawmakers were joined on Tuesday by Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.).

The original legislation mentioned above (The Judiciary Act of 2021) was introduced in April that year by Sen. Ed Markey (MA), House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler (NY) and Reps. Hank Johnson (GA) and Mondaire Jones (NY). The Judiciary Act calls for enlarging the Supreme Court from nine seats to 13 seats, a move the lawmakers said would “reform” and restore balance to a court that they say held a 6-3 conservative majority.

“We are here today because the United States Supreme Court is broken, it is out of balance, and it needs to be fixed. Too many Americans view our highest court in the land as a partisan, political institution, not our impartial judicial branch of government,” Markey said at a press conference at the time.

“Some people will say we’re packing the court. We’re not packing it, we’re unpacking it. Senator McConnell and the Republicans packed the court over the past couple of years,” said Nadler. “So, this is a reaction to that. It’s a necessary step in the evolution of the court.”

Since the Judiciary Act of 2021 was introduced in the early days of his presidency, Joe Biden pretended to oppose it. However, as both Republicans and Democrats are prone to do, Biden simply waited a few days for the heat to cool before announcing the formation of a “bipartisan” commission to conduct a 180-day study of potential changes to the Court, including court packing and setting term limits for justices.

“The Commission’s purpose is to provide an analysis of the principal arguments in the contemporary public debate for and against Supreme Court reform, including an appraisal of the merits and legality of particular reform proposals,” the White House said in a statement. “The topics it will examine include the genesis of the reform debate; the Court’s role in the Constitutional system; the length of service and turnover of justices on the Court; the membership and size of the Court; and the Court’s case selection, rules, and practices.”

The Commission punted on the matter of expanding the number of justices serving on the Supreme Court, choosing instead to push for term limits (via New York Times):

Commissioners are divided on whether court expansion would be wise,” one draft paper said. “The risks of court expansion are considerable, including that it could undermine the very goal of some of its proponents of restoring the court’s legitimacy.”

“Recent polls suggest that a majority of the public does not support court expansion,” the paper said. “And as even some supporters of court expansion acknowledged during the commission’s public hearings, the reform — at least if it were done in the near term and all at once — would be perceived by many as a partisan maneuver.”

A second draft paper from another working group, on imposing limits on the justices’ tenure, took a different tone.

“Among the proposals for reforming the Supreme Court, term limits for Supreme Court justices appear to enjoy the most widespread and bipartisan support,” the paper said. (Emphasis mine)

Calling the far-left extremist plan to hijack the Supreme Court “partisan” is as plain as the nose on your face; we need look no further than Sen. Chuck Schumer’s (D-NY) attack on Justice Stephen Breyer for proof.

A few days before the Justice Act of 2021 was introduced, Demand Justice, a Chuck Schumer-led group that described itself as “a progressive movement fighting to restore balance to the courts,” demanded that Breyer retire in order to begin transforming the high court — a transformation that included the far-left extremist plan to hijack the Supreme Court.

Ironically, Justice Bryer openly opposed expanding the Supreme Court because it would ultimately undermine public trust in the court and its decisions.

“I hope and expect that the court will retain its authority. But that authority, like the rule of law, depends on trust, a trust that the court is guided by legal principle, not politics. Structural alteration motivated by the perception of political influence can only feed that perception, further eroding that trust.” (Emphasis mine)

One of the things preventing Schumer and his far-left extremists buddies from succeeding with their plan to hijack the Supreme Court so far is the threat of a likely filibuster. Not to worry though. Chuck has already been working on a filibuster “reform” plan that will make success a very real possibility.

Getting rid of the filibuster was a given when Markey originally introduced the Justice Act of 2021. “We begin the case today, clearly we would want Republicans to vote with us,” said Markey. “But if they are not willing to participate in that effort, then we can still do this on a basis of 51 votes, and that will ultimately require a repeal of the filibuster and passage of this legislation with 51 votes.”

Any doubts as to the motivation behind the plan by far-left extremists to hijack the Supreme Court were answered earlier this week when Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, and an army of pro-abortion groups appeared in front of the Supreme Court building to rally in support of the Judiciary Act.

One year ago, in response to the leaked draft of the Supreme Court majority opinion changing abortion “rights” in America, far-left extremists called for the elimination of the filibuster in the Senate, the hijacking of the Supreme Court by expanding the number of seats on the bench, and the codification of Roe v. Wade as the law of the land.

The reintroduction of the Judiciary Act makes these things very likely to happen.


David Leach is the owner of the Strident Conservative. He holds people of every political stripe accountable for their failure to uphold conservative values, and he promotes those values instead of political parties.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook.

Subscribe to receive podcasts of his daily radio feature: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | iHeart | RSS

For media inquiries or to have David speak to your group, use the Contact Us form.