On court-packing and the death of democracy

This is a brief post to follow up on my latest comments regarding court-packing.

In 2016, when Antonin Scalia died, I wrote that the Democrats' only real option in response to McConnell's Supreme Court blockade would be to resort to court-packing-- an expansion of the Supreme Court.  I can't link to those posts anymore, since The Unmutual Political Blog is no more, but perhaps you recall that I've been beating this drum for years.

Yeah, I know some things.

Right now, the Democrats are just saying it out loud.  Court-packing.  McConnell has done what everyone with a brain knew he'd do-- renege on his bullshit, invented principle of "no Supreme Court confirmations in an election year," and he's promising to confirm whomever Trump nominates.  And Democrats are saying that they will respond by expanding the Supreme Court.

So... here's the problem.  Game this out.  From the Republican side, this means what?  It means that if they cede power to the Democrats, that Court gets packed.  What's their pre-emptive response?  (In game theory, this is called "backwards induction.")

We already know Trump will refuse to step down voluntarily.  If letting Trump go down means letting the Democrats pack the Court-- which they are now saying out loud-- what do Republicans do?  They are already lining up to ensure that Trump can challenge an election that he might lose, and this forces their hand.

Because otherwise, the Democrats pack the Supreme Court.

Yes, court-packing would have been the right move.  But, making it clear to Republicans that Democrats would do it means that Republicans aren't going to cede power.

If it sounds like I'm talking about the absolute death of democracy, I am.

Comments