This is a wild statement from a top Democrat.
Democrats are renewing their push for a dramatic transformation of the U.S. Supreme Court, with one prominent lawmaker now openly supporting a plan that would add four new justices to the nation’s highest court.
Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., said Sunday that he supports expanding the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13, a proposal that would fundamentally alter the makeup of a court where conservatives currently hold a commanding majority.
The debate carries especially high stakes for President Donald Trump and Republicans.
Trump transformed the Supreme Court during his first term by successfully appointing three justices — Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Those appointments helped establish the current 6-3 conservative majority and produced a lasting judicial legacy that could influence American law for decades.
Now, some Democrats want Congress to change the size of the court itself.
Republicans have repeatedly condemned such proposals as “court packing,” warning that adding seats for political reasons could undermine the independence of the Supreme Court and trigger an escalating battle whenever control of Washington changes hands.
Supporters of Supreme Court expansion argue that Congress has the constitutional authority to determine the court’s size and that reform is needed.
The growing disagreement sets up another major political fight over the future of the Supreme Court.
Clyburn Wants 13 Supreme Court Justices
Clyburn made his position clear during an appearance Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” with Kristen Welker.
Welker asked the South Carolina Democrat about former Vice President Kamala Harris’s support for expanding the Supreme Court from nine members to 13.
Clyburn agreed with the idea.
He argued that the political and legal circumstances facing the country require Congress to consider significant action. Clyburn then endorsed 13 as an appropriate number of justices, referring to the total as a “baker’s dozen.”
The proposal would mean creating four additional seats on the Supreme Court.
Who ultimately filled those seats would depend heavily on which political party controlled the presidency and Senate when vacancies were created.
That is one reason Republicans consider the issue so consequential.
If a Democratic president were able to nominate four new justices and a Democratic-controlled Senate confirmed them, the ideological balance of the Supreme Court could potentially change dramatically.
Trump’s Supreme Court Legacy Could Face a Major Challenge
Few accomplishments from Trump’s first presidency have had a more lasting effect on American government than his Supreme Court appointments.
Trump entered office in 2017 with an open Supreme Court seat following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. He nominated Gorsuch to fill the vacancy.
Trump later nominated Kavanaugh following Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement and Barrett following Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death.
The three appointments cemented a conservative majority that has subsequently issued landmark decisions involving abortion, gun rights, religious liberty, presidential authority, federal regulations and other major constitutional questions.
For conservative voters, the judiciary has consequently remained one of the most important parts of Trump’s political legacy.
Expanding the Supreme Court could potentially give a future president the opportunity to alter that balance without waiting for existing justices to retire or leave the bench.
That possibility is at the center of Republican opposition to court expansion.
Clyburn Attacks the Direction of the Supreme Court
Clyburn did not limit his criticism to the number of justices.
The veteran Democrat argued that the Supreme Court has moved the country in the wrong direction and invoked the notorious 1857 Dred Scott decision while criticizing the modern court.
Chief Justice Roger Taney wrote the majority opinion in Dred Scott, which denied U.S. citizenship to Black Americans under the constitutional interpretation adopted by the court at that time.
The decision is widely regarded today as one of the darkest moments in Supreme Court history.
Clyburn suggested that the current court has reversed important legal progress, particularly concerning constitutional and civil rights issues.
He then directed particularly strong criticism toward Justice Clarence Thomas.
Clarence Thomas Comes Under Fire
Clyburn’s criticism of Thomas is especially noteworthy because the two men have a history stretching back decades.
Thomas was nominated to the Supreme Court by President George H.W. Bush in 1991.
At the time, Clyburn publicly supported Thomas and described him as a friend despite their political disagreements.
His opinion has changed dramatically.
Clyburn said Sunday that he no longer stands behind his earlier support for Thomas and acknowledged that he now considers that decision a mistake.
The congressman said he had expected Thomas’s background and experiences to influence his approach to the law differently.
Thomas has instead emerged as one of the Supreme Court’s most consistently conservative members.
He has frequently advocated interpreting the Constitution according to its original meaning and has been willing to reconsider longstanding legal precedents when he believes they were wrongly decided.
Those positions have made Thomas an influential figure among conservatives and a frequent target of criticism from the political left.
Democrats Increasingly Discuss Supreme Court Expansion
Clyburn isn’t alone.
Former Vice President Kamala Harris has also raised the possibility of increasing the Supreme Court to 13 members.
The number has a specific rationale among supporters: the federal judiciary currently has 13 judicial circuits, and advocates have argued that the number of Supreme Court justices should once again correspond with the number of circuits.
Other Democrats have previously endorsed court expansion as well.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., announced her support for expanding the court in 2021, arguing that changes were necessary to protect the country’s democratic institutions.
Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., has also supported legislation that would increase the size of the Supreme Court.
More recently, Democratic lawmakers have continued pursuing the issue in Congress.
Legislation introduced during the current Congress proposes increasing the Supreme Court from nine members to 13.
Whether such legislation could actually become law is another question entirely.
Can Democrats Actually Add Four Supreme Court Justices?
The Constitution created the Supreme Court but did not permanently establish nine as the required number of justices.
Congress determines the court’s size through federal law.
In fact, the number of Supreme Court justices changed several times during the nation’s earlier history before eventually settling at nine in 1869.
That means expanding the court would not necessarily require a constitutional amendment.
Congress could pass legislation changing the number of seats, although accomplishing that in today’s deeply divided political environment would be extremely difficult.
Any serious attempt would immediately become one of the biggest battles in Washington.
Republicans would almost certainly mount fierce opposition, while Democrats themselves would need sufficient congressional support to advance the proposal.
The Senate’s legislative filibuster could create another major obstacle depending on the political circumstances at the time.
Why Republicans Call It ‘Court Packing’
Republicans have long argued that increasing the number of Supreme Court seats because politicians disagree with existing decisions would amount to court packing.
Their concern extends beyond the immediate ideological makeup of the court.
Conservatives warn about the precedent such a move could establish.
Imagine one political party increases the court from nine justices to 13 after gaining control of Congress and the White House.
What prevents the opposing party from increasing it to 15, 17 or even 21 justices the next time it takes power?
Critics fear that such an escalating cycle could transform the Supreme Court into an institution whose membership repeatedly changes according to election results.
That, they argue, could weaken public confidence in the judiciary and make Supreme Court nominations even more political than they already are.
Democratic supporters of expansion reject that characterization.
They contend that Congress has changed the Supreme Court’s size before and retains the legal authority to do so again.
Biden Sought Different Supreme Court Reforms
Former President Joe Biden spent much of his presidency resisting demands from progressives to expand the Supreme Court.
He eventually embraced other major changes to the institution.
Biden supported Supreme Court term limits, a binding ethics code and a constitutional amendment addressing presidential immunity.
Those proposals did not go as far as creating additional Supreme Court seats, but they demonstrated the Democratic Party’s growing willingness to consider major structural changes involving the judiciary.
The conversation has continued since then.
With Harris and Clyburn now supporting discussion of a 13-member Supreme Court, the issue could become increasingly important heading toward future elections.
Why the Supreme Court Battle Matters to Americans
Although fights over the judiciary can sometimes seem distant from everyday life, Supreme Court decisions can directly affect millions of Americans.
The justices routinely consider cases involving taxes, property rights, gun ownership, religious freedom, elections, abortion, immigration, federal regulations, presidential authority, free speech and the power of government agencies.
The court can also determine whether actions taken by a president or Congress comply with the Constitution.
That gives Supreme Court appointments consequences extending far beyond a single election cycle.
Presidents come and go. Members of Congress face voters regularly.
Supreme Court justices, however, receive lifetime appointments and can remain on the bench for decades.
That is precisely why the battle over four potential new seats carries such enormous political significance.
Trump’s Three Justices Remain Central to the Debate
Trump’s three Supreme Court appointments fundamentally changed the judiciary and remain a major part of his political legacy.
For many conservative voters, those appointments represented fulfillment of one of Trump’s most important campaign promises.
For many Democrats, however, the resulting conservative majority has become a source of growing frustration.
That disagreement is now fueling competing visions for the future of the Supreme Court.
Republicans generally want to preserve the current nine-member structure and fill future vacancies through the traditional nomination and confirmation process.
A growing group of Democrats believes broader structural changes should be considered.
Clyburn’s latest remarks show that Supreme Court expansion is no longer merely a theoretical debate taking place on the political sidelines.
Prominent Democrats are discussing it openly.
A Major Political Fight Could Be Ahead
For now, the Supreme Court remains at nine justices, and Clyburn’s remarks do not change its membership or ideological balance.
But the political implications are difficult to ignore.
Expanding the court to 13 members would create four new Supreme Court seats and potentially give whichever party controlled the presidency and Senate an extraordinary opportunity to influence the direction of American law.
Republicans view that possibility as a direct threat to the conservative judicial victories achieved during the Trump era.
Democrats supporting expansion see it as a legitimate reform of an institution they believe requires significant change.
Either way, the issue presents voters with a clear question about the future of one of America’s most powerful institutions.
Should the Supreme Court remain at nine members, as it has for more than 150 years?
Or should Congress create four additional seats and establish a 13-member court?
With Democrats continuing to discuss expansion and Republicans determined to protect the current structure, the fight over Trump’s Supreme Court legacy may only be beginning.