Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Leads Calls To Expand Supreme Court After Texas Abortion Law

Authored by newsweek.com and submitted by newnemo

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is calling for the U.S. Supreme Court to be expanded following the decision not to block a new restrictive abortion law in Texas.

Ocasio-Cortez, a Democrat representing New York's 14th congressional district, appeared to lead demands to add more justices to the nine-member court in reaction to the ruling.

The Supreme Court voted 5-4 against granting an emergency stay of Senate Bill (SB) 8 on Wednesday. The Texas law effectively prohibits all abortions after around six weeks of pregnancy.

Read more Trump Justices Cast Crucial Votes on Abortion Ban Undermining Roe v. Wade Trump Justices Cast Crucial Votes on Abortion Ban Undermining Roe v. Wade

Ocasio-Cortez tweeted early Thursday morning following the unsigned order, which had been issued just before midnight.

"Republicans promised to overturn Roe v Wade, and they have," Ocasio-Cortez said.

"Democrats can either abolish the filibuster and expand the court, or do nothing as millions of peoples' bodies, rights, and lives are sacrificed for far-right minority rule. This shouldn't be a difficult decision," she went on.

In the court's order, the majority noted that they were not addressing the constitutionality of SB8 and that legal recourse remained to those challenging the law. However, critics charge that the court's decision undermines the precedent set in the landmark 1973 case Roe V. Wade, which established a right to abortion nationwide. The court has not overturned that precedent, however.

Republicans promised to overturn Roe v Wade, and they have.

Democrats can either abolish the filibuster and expand the court, or do nothing as millions of peoples’ bodies, rights, and lives are sacrificed for far-right minority rule.

This shouldn’t be a difficult decision. https://t.co/GcEjkxt3gs — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) September 2, 2021

Ocasio-Cortez has previously expressed support for expanding the court. The idea is often referred to as court-packing. Some of her Democratic colleagues have also argued for the idea, including Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts.

Before the Supreme Court issued its order on Wednesday, Markey tweeted: "Expand the Supreme Court."

Markey was one of four Democrats who introduced the Judiciary Act of 2021 in March this year, along with Representative Jerry Nadler, who is chair of the House Judiciary Committee, and Representatives Hank Johnson and Mondaire Jones.

The proposed new law would expand the court's membership from nine to 13 but appeared to have little chance of success as Democrats have a razor-thin majority in the Senate and President Joe Biden has publicly opposed court-packing the past.

Even if Democrats had the votes to pass court expansion in the Senate, Republicans could still deploy the filibuster to prevent the act from passing and there may not be enough support to abolish the procedure, as Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) opposes abolition.

Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA) called for the filibuster to be abolished in a tweet on Wednesday before the court's decision on SB8: "When the Senate reconvenes later this month, we have an important choice to make: whether we will allow an archaic, undemocratic rule that's nowhere to be found in the Constitution to stymy progress on issues of critical importance. WE MUST END THE FILIBUSTER."

Following the court's failure to respond to the emergency application for relief on Tuesday, Representative Bill Pascrell of New Jersey's 9th district said Republicans had "packed the courts with political operatives to impose by fiat policies they can't win at the ballot box."

Despite Democrats' reaction to the Supreme Court's recent decisions, it remains to be seen if the party leadership will embrace expanding the court and whether they have the votes to do so.

ChirurgeonCrane on September 2nd, 2021 at 19:19 UTC »

"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe. Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn. - not me

femacampcouncilor on September 2nd, 2021 at 16:46 UTC »

We have a rapist on the supreme court. What line has to be crossed before you see the government as invalid?

xstegosaurusx on September 2nd, 2021 at 16:40 UTC »

We should note that it’s one of our younger representatives that views this crisis as what it is: an existential threat to our democracy. The dinosaurs on the hill, Biden included, seem to think we’re about to move back to some good-faith debate between conservatism and reality to come to this reasonable agreement about how to move forward.

Green New Deal, pack the court, protect the right to vote, protect the right to safe and legal abortion (abortion does not go away because we make it illegal): these are policies that take reality seriously. Nitpicking tax cuts and what infrastructure counts as infrastructure is decadent time-wasting in hopes of preserving a political reputation when you’re dead and gone. Legislate for life now and in the future, like AOC, not in deference to an antiquated and disappearing ideological framework.