[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 67 (Monday, April 19, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2038-S2039]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS

                                 ______
                                 

  SENATE RESOLUTION 164--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE 
  NUMBER OF JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES SHOULD 
                              REMAIN AT 9

  Mr. DAINES (for himself, Mr. Lankford, and Mr. Rubio) submitted the 
following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the 
Judiciary:

                              S. Res. 164

       Whereas the first section of the Act entitled ``An Act to 
     amend the Judicial System of the United States'', approved 
     April 10, 1869 (commonly known as the ``Judiciary Act of 
     1869'') (16 Stat. 44; chapter 22), states that ``the Supreme 
     Court of the United States shall hereafter consist of the 
     Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate 
     justices'';
       Whereas the Supreme Court of the United States has 
     consisted of a Chief Justice and 8 associate Justices for 152 
     years;
       Whereas previous attempts to increase the number of 
     justices on the Supreme Court of the United States have been 
     rejected and widely condemned by individuals of both 
     political parties;
       Whereas, in 1937, when former President Franklin Delano 
     Roosevelt proposed the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 
     1937, a bill that sought to expand the number of justices on 
     the Supreme Court of the United States from 9 justices to 15 
     Justices, he was harshly criticized by both parties and his 
     own Vice President, John Nance Garner;
       Whereas, the 1937 Senate Judiciary Committee report, in 
     response to the Court-packing plan by President Roosevelt, 
     decried the plan as ``a needless, futile, and utterly 
     dangerous abandonment of constitutional principle'', that 
     ``[i]ts ultimate operation would be to make this government 
     one of men rather than one of law'' and that it was ``a 
     measure, which should be so emphatically rejected that its 
     parallel will never again be presented to the free 
     representatives of the free people of America'';
       Whereas, during the Trump Administration, Democrats have 
     refused to recognize the legitimacy of nominations made by 
     President Trump to the Supreme Court of the United States and 
     have advocated for packing the Court with additional justices 
     appointed by a future Democrat president;
       Whereas, in 1983 during a Senate Judiciary Committee 
     hearing, then-Senator Joe Biden

[[Page S2039]]

     noted that Court packing was a ``bonehead idea'' and ``a 
     terrible, terrible mistake'' that ``put in question for an 
     entire decade the independence of the most significant body--
     including the Congress, in my view--the most significant body 
     in this country, the Supreme Court of the United States of 
     America'';
       Whereas, in 2005 during a speech on the Senate floor, then-
     Senator Joe Biden praised members of the Democrat Party for 
     their ``act of courage'' in opposing the Court-packing plan 
     of President Roosevelt, which he described as a ``power 
     grab'';
       Whereas, in 2019, the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg 
     stated, ``I think it was a bad idea when President Franklin 
     Roosevelt tried to pack the Court'', and that ``if anything 
     would make the Court look partisan, it would be that'';
       Whereas, in 2021, Justice Stephen Breyer urged supporters 
     of court packing to ``think long and hard'' about undermining 
     the independence of the court, noting that it is imperative 
     the public ``trust that the court is guided by legal 
     principle, not politics'' and that ``structural alteration 
     motivated by the perception of political influence can only 
     feed that latter perception, further eroding that trust'';
       Whereas the Constitution of the United States is based on 
     the principle of separation of powers to provide for checks 
     and balances on each branch of the Federal Government and 
     expanding the Supreme Court of the United States purely for 
     political advantage threatens the separation of powers and 
     the system of checks and balances established in the 
     Constitution of the United States;
       Whereas the Federal judiciary is insulated from political 
     influence through lifetime appointments and other measures to 
     preserve its independence and an attempt to expand the 
     Supreme Court of the United States purely for political 
     purposes threatens the independence and integrity of the 
     Supreme Court and, thus, the entirety of the judiciary it 
     oversees; and
       Whereas any attempt to increase the number of justices of 
     the Supreme Court of the United States or ``pack the Court'' 
     would undermine the democratic institutions and destroy the 
     credibility of the highest court in the United States: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the Senate opposes any attempt to increase 
     the number of justices of the Supreme Court of the United 
     States or otherwise pack the Court.

                          ____________________