Court Packing 2.0: Why The U.S. Supreme Court Should Not Be Changed

Written by John A. Sparks

Six months ago, the idea of expanding the size of the U.S. Supreme Court was side-stepped by presidential candidate Joe Biden, and the issue seemed to wane. But now, “court packing” has surfaced once again—and in two forms. The first is an executive order from President Biden creating a commission to study possible reforms of the U.S. Supreme Court. The second is legislation proposed by progressive Democrats to increase the court’s size by four new justices.… Continue Reading

Packing the Court

… Continue Reading

Democrats Take First Steps to Pack the U.S. Supreme Court; Justice Breyer Warns it’s a Bad Idea

Written by Liberty McArtor

America moved closer to a 180-degree shift last week when President Joe Biden established the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States. And now, the treacherous idea of court-packing is closer to becoming reality, as Democrats filed a bill this week to add four (4) seats to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In examining “reforms” to the U.S. Supreme Court, the major issue the commission will examine is court-packing—put simply, increasing the number of justices on the U.S.… Continue Reading

Why the Fuss?

Written by Thorin Anderson

Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 78 that the U.S. Supreme Court would be the weakest branch of government because it had “no influence over either the sword or the purse.”  Why then the panic and flaming hair on the Democrat side of the isle with the elevation of Amy Coney Barrett to that Court?  What gives?  She claims to be an originalist, and by definition an originalist ignores his or her own policy preferences and yields to the intention of the U.S.… Continue Reading

16 Questions Conservatives Should Ask Any SCOTUS Nominee

Written by Daniel Horowitz

Democrats never have any doubts about their court nominees. They know with certainty that once their picks are on the court, they will be willing to do anything in a real case to interpret the U.S. Constitution the way they see it. They will rule with the party’s preferred political outcomes regardless of past precedent or the plain meaning of the Constitution. There is no reason why conservatives cannot have that same confidence that GOP nominees will rule on the side of the original meaning of the U.S.… Continue Reading

An Important Win for Religious Liberty: Espinoza v. Montana

Written by John A. Sparks

Sometimes, the facts of a case have an emotional appeal in addition to a strong constitutional basis. Espinoza v. Montana certainly qualifies.

Kendra Espinoza, a hard working (three jobs) and determined single mom, decided to take her two daughters out of the local public schools and enroll them in Stillwater Christian School in Kalispell, Montana. She explained that she “wanted them to be able to read the Bible and be taught how to pray, and taught from that faith-based perspective.”… Continue Reading

From the Redcoats to the Black Robes

Written by Daniel Horowitz

King George couldn’t hold a candle to the judicial despotism we are governed by some 12 score and three years after the colonists rebelled against what they thought were “intolerable acts.” Sure, there was some taxation without representation going on in the 1770s, but I think the colonists would have taken that any day if they were to see in their crystal ball the severity of today’s social transformation without representation.

We celebrate so much more than the founding of a new nation on July 4.… Continue Reading