jake3988: A) There are no open spots.

That's only because people like having nine. There is no set limitation in the Constitution. Why doesn't Obama appoint both Bill and Hillary? That's keep an odd number and will ensure a progressive majority for quite a while.

JQPublic: The number of justices is set by law at nine. To prevent the president from doing just that. If Obama was able, and stupid enough to appoint Bill and Hillary to the Supreme Court, he would not get re-elected and the next Republican administration would add more than enough conservative justices to tilt the court back to the right, and so on, and so on...

No, it's not. FDR tried it once but Justice Roberts finally saw the light. Get a Democrat in the White House, with a Democratic Senate and I'd like to see 20 if not 50 progressive Justices put in place. That will keep the Republicans at bay for a long time.

arkansas: Lol, yeah go ahead and try to pack the court and see what happens. If a giant like FDR couldn't pull that off I sincerely doubt that the used car salesmen running the Democratic Party now could pull it off. Try it and see how many decades it takes to have another Democratic President or Congress.

We've already seen what seven years of Republican rule has gotten us. FDR was coming in. Besides people are much more informed this time and will see through the Republican smokescreen.

Now I doubt President Obama could pull it off, but Hillary has shown that the base of the Democratic party will support her, and she'll respond to the criticisms of the Republicans quite well. See her act in NH, she knows how to counter an attack. Get her in the White House and we'll see her appoint Bill as Supreme Court Justice. I would love if she resigns seven years and 350 days to go and gets her VP to appoint her to the other seat. Imagine both Clintons on the Court screwing Republicans for the rest of their natural lives.

JQPublic: Yes it is. The Judiciary Act of 1869 (new window) set the Supreme Court at one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices.

Congress can easily pass a new law changing that.

arkansas: The butt-spanking she (and her party) got over the health-care debacle would prove to be a tiny rumble compared to the earthquake if she were to try to pack the Supreme Court.

If you haven't been paying attention, people are clamoring for Hillary's plan now. Imagine the lives we would have saved if we only had listened to her a decade ago instead of letting the Republicans derail it. So when the Republicans try and scream about it, everyone is going to ignore their attempts to shred the Constitution and just say "ok, we'll let the right-wing Court continue"? No, if told right, people will be clamoring for more progressives on the court and that's the way to get it in.

JQPublic: Perhaps you should contact the campaigns of Obama or Hillary and suggest that they run on a platform of adding 20 to 50 leftwing Supreme Court Justices...what?...no?...stupid idea? Recipe for fail?

The American public wouldn't understand it at this point. You get into office and then you do this things. It's just another thing that the people of this country aren't smart enough to understand. Get into office, and wait until the right-wingers on the Court knock something down. Move like FDR and point out how they tried to stop him before (and how that their stalling exacerbated the Great Depression) and people will jump at the idea of only 20 new Justices before they extend this depression.