Lefties are trying to pack the court. But if they change the law, guess who will pick new judges? Trump.

After decades of forcing their agenda down the throats of Americans through the Supreme Court, liberals were suddenly counseling restraint after Justice Anthony Kennedy retired last summer.

Now, in the name of upholding “democracy,” the Democrats are desperately scrambling to come up with ideas to pack the court with progressives. But if they make these changes, President Donald Trump will be the one to take advantage. They’re loading a gun aimed at themselves.

Dems eye court-packing

Court-packing proposals include expanding the number of Supreme Court justices to as many as 13 and imposing term limits on justices, who serve for life. Somehow, the Democrats are justifying this court-packing fantasy as a democratic initiative rather than a nakedly authoritarian power grab.

At the forefront of the charge is a group of left-wing academics, 1/20/21 Action Fund, which aims to add four seats to the highest court to “save our broken democracy,” by which they presumably mean keeping right-wingers off the courts in perpetuity with an emergency plan actually called Pack the Courts.

“To save our broken democracy, we’re launching an emergency initiative called Pack the Courts to add four the seats to the U.S. Supreme Court. This fight won’t be easy or quick, but we can do it. We must do it — or our democracy may never recover.”

The irony of “saving democracy” by cramming a non-democratic institution with liberal justices is rich, especially given the Democrats’ history of using the court as a cudgel to force their values on the American people. But desperate times call for desperate measures, apparently.

The project’s leaders are Aaron Belkin, a political science professor and LGBT advocate, and #AbolishIce creator Sean McElwee, who said that changing the court’s structure is necessary to counteract a right-wing conspiracy to crush democracy with “gerrymandering, voter suppression, and massive political spending empowered by Citizens United” which has “allow[ed] Republicans to take control of the three branches of government without ever earning a majority of votes.”

The project has the support of numerous left-wing law professors. Thousands of liberal law professors came out in force to oppose Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation.

Shooting themselves in the foot?

In fear of losing their power, Democrats have embraced once-fringe ideas about the SCOTUS. Even some Democratic presidential candidates are showing interest, including Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), who told a podcast that court-packing and term limits are “interesting idea[s],” although she fell short of endorsing them.

The idea began to catch fire on the left in the wake of Kennedy’s retirement, which sent leftists into a panic about the possibility of Trump solidifying a conservative bloc on the court for generations. Between Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, the liberal bloc on the bench has been whittled down to a minority of four, and two of them, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, are octogenarians.

To maintain their hold on the court, Democrats have also discussed investigating Kavanaugh for perjury during his confirmation hearings or simply impeaching him. The Democrats obviously want power by any means, but they should be careful lest they end up shooting themselves in the foot. President Trump has the power right now to nominate judges, and with Republicans having shored up their Senate majority after the midterms, it’s full speed ahead for Trump’s judicial nominations.

Trump fills courts with conservatives

Filling court vacancies with conservatives has been one of Trump’s quieter achievements. Trump has led a furious push that has alarmed progressives, nominating 51 judges — enough to fill one-third of lower-court vacancies — on Wednesday alone. By some estimates, Trump has already added more than 80 federal judges to district and appeals courts, plus his two Supreme Court picks.

Even NeverTrumpers grudgingly approve of Trump’s success with the judiciary. Progressives who are watching are desperate to do something about these developments, but changing the law before gaining the power to use it is probably not a smart idea.

The Constitution doesn’t specify the number of justices and leaves it up to Congress, which set the number at nine in 1869.