Repeatedly the Supreme Court has postponed critical cases and used various means to impart delays in others. Considering the nature of he cases, some might consider this an example of partisan favoritism, but I have another analysis: The nation’s highest court is clearly overburdened and needs some relief. The justices clearly find their case load so heavy that they cannot cover all the bases in a timely fashion. The solution is readily at hand — add more members to the court.
The legality of this increase has already been contested and verified during the administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The court had been log jamming FDR’s program to pull the nation out of the depression, but the crisis was averted and progress restored by the retirement of the chief justice. Roosevelt never had to proceed with this increase of justices, but the method remains for us to use now if we need it. Other than the argument stated above, what other justification would support this increase of Supreme Court seats?
1) There is no specific number for justices on this court stated in the constitution.
2) The number of justices was considered for change in the past, from ten to seven, but in compromise during 1869 the number was set at nine, a number which has not changed since then.
3) In the census of 1870 the population of the U. S. was 38,925,598. The current population is around 333,300,000. This represents an increase of about 856% (8½ times). During the past 154 years the same nine justices have faced an ever increasing burden, and they had few means to deal with the proportionately increased case load. They may have refused to hear cases that they should have heard, or they could just have deferred cases until their calendar cleared up. Both seem to have happened.
President Biden has the means to bring relief to these overworked justices. He can appoint several more justices, so that they could hear more of important cases and work in a more timely fashion. One might think that they would appreciate the expansion of their capabilities.
Some may consider this suggestion a merely partisan exercise, but not so. If any business found that its market share had increased by 8½ times, they would not refuse the additional business. They would prudently hire more staff and rake in the additional profit.
We need to show the same sense in increasing the number of Supreme Court members so that their capabilities will increase to modern requirements.