05/19/2024

The New York Times published an op-ed Saturday calling for Congress to ‘discipline’ the Supreme Court in response to the court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie wrote an outline of how Democrats could reign in the high court in a piece titled, “How to Discipline a Rogue Supreme Court.”

“The Supreme Court does not exist above the constitutional system.” Bouie wrote. He added that the “rouge” court “cannot shield itself from the power of other branches.”

Among the options Bouie listed are impeaching and removing justices and packing the court.

“It [Congress] can impeach and remove justices. It can increase or decrease the size of the court itself (at its inception, the Supreme Court had only six members),” he wrote.

The White House confirmed on Saturday that President Biden opposes plans to pack the court.

Bouie also suggested that Congress impose a supermajority requirement on the Supreme Court or “strip the court of its jurisdiction over certain issues.”

“In the face of a reckless, reactionary and power-hungry court, Congress has options. The problem is politics,” Bouie wrote.

This is similar to claims made by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, D-N.Y., who said the Supreme Court ruling is “illegitimate” and called on supporters to take their grievances “into the streets.” Bouie argued the Supreme Court has an “almost total lack of democratic legitimacy”.

“Despite the arrogance of the current Supreme Court — despite its almost total lack of democratic legitimacy — there is little to no appetite within the Democratic Party for a fight over the nature of the court and its place in our constitutional system,” he added.

Bouie expressed admiration for President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who he said threatened the Supreme Court into allowing most of FDR’s New Deal to stand.

“For many Democrats, President Roosevelt’s attempt to expand the size of the court is less a triumph than a cautionary tale — a testament to the limits of presidential leadership and presidential power,” he wrote. “But Roosevelt did eventually get a Supreme Court that allowed most of the New Deal to stand. The threat worked. The court was humbled.”

“It will take time to build the kind of power and consensus needed to make significant changes to the court,” Bouie argued.

He continued, “But even the work of amassing that power and putting that consensus together can stand as a credible threat to a Supreme Court that has acted, under conservative control, as if it stands above the constitutional system, unaccountable to anyone other than itself.”