- Position1 of 2›
- Both Democrats should win
- Argument1 of 3›
Expand the Supreme Court
There are members of the Democratic party who wish to expand the Supreme Court. The issue would never pass under a Republican-controlled Senate but could find light in a Democratic one.
The argument
Expanding the Supreme Court has become a hot-button political issue since the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the US Supreme Court. With the Democratic Party leaning further left, a Democratically controlled Senate could lead to the expansion of the Court. It is not uncommon for the Supreme Court to be expanded. However, the issue has become hyper-partisan, with Republicans chastising Democrats for even considering it as an option. If Democrats are serious about expanding and filling the Supreme Court with new justices, they need a Democratic Senate to do so. An expanded Court could take some of the weight off of the older justices, protect social welfare programs, and show that the Democrats are willing to listen to the more left-leaning camp in their party. Expanding the Court is likely to be a cornerstone of Democratic politics for years to come. But, in order for any movement to happen on the issue, the Democrats need to control the Senate.
Premises
Counter-arguments
Expanding the Supreme Court should not happen under a Biden Presidency. The idea is wildly unpopular in the country, and Democrats should not push to do something that a majority of the country does not want.
Rejecting the premises
[Rejecting P1] Whether the Senate is needed is a procedural fact rather than a reason to want the outcome, and the premise assumes that expansion is desirable instead of arguing it. Its own framing — a priority of one wing of one party — is a thin basis for a claim about who should win an election. [Rejecting P2] The three benefits are asserted and pull in different directions: workload relief is an administrative point that more judges in the lower courts would also address, protecting particular programmes is a claim about outcomes rather than about the institution, and signalling to a faction is party management. None reaches the conclusion, and the counter's objection about public support goes unanswered.