Johnson’s “Keep the Nine” Constitutional Amendment Gains 100 House Cosponsors

@SoDakCampaigns

Johnson’s “Keep the Nine” Constitutional Amendment Gains 100 House Cosponsors

Washington, D.C. – Today, as House and Senate Democrats unveiled legislation to expand the Supreme Court to thirteen justices, U.S. Representative Dusty Johnson (R-SD) announced that his constitutional amendment to cap the Supreme Court at nine justices reached 100 cosponsors in the House.

“The idea to pack the court is no longer conceptual, it’s a legitimate threat to politicize our nation’s most sacred judicial institution,” said Johnson. “I’m proud that my constitutional amendment to safeguard the Supreme Court from partisan politics reached 100 cosponsors today. We can’t risk compromising the public trust of the highest court in the land.”

Click here to watch Johnson’s full video clip.

H.J. Res. 11 is supported by Freedom Works, Keep the Nine Coalition, the Republican National Committee, Americans for Limited Government (ALEC), National Federation of Republican Women, Americans for Limited Government and cosponsored by Randy K. Weber (TX-14), Troy Balderson (R-OH), Kelly Armstrong (ND-AL), Dan Meuser (PA-09), Debbie Lesko (AZ-08), Jeff Duncan (SC-03), Mike Kelly (PA-16), August Pfluger (TX-11), Fred Keller (PA-12), David Joyce (OH-14), Brian Babin (TX-36), John Katko (NY-24), Jerry Carl (AL-01), Randy Feenstra (IA-4), Rep. Chris Stewart (UT-02), Rep. Bill Posey (FL-08) , John Rutherford (FL-4), John Curtis (R-UT), Jim Baird (IN-04), Ben Cline (VA-06), Ashley Hinson (IA-01), William Timmons (SC-04), Don Bacon (NE-02), Thomas P. Tiffany (WI-07), Ken Calvert (CA-42), Michelle Fischbach (MN-07), Bob Gibbs (OH-07), Tracey Mann (KS-01), Glenn Grothman (WI-06), Rick W. Allen (GA-12), Lisa McClain (MI-10), Tom Rice (SC-07) , Virginia Foxx (NC-05), Joe Wilson (SC-2), David B. McKinley (WV-01), David Rouzer (NC-7), Ralph Norman (SC-5), Jaime Herrera Beutler (WA-03), Pete Stauber (MN-8), Louie Gohmert (TX-01), Jack Bergman (MI-01), Miller-Meeks (IA-02) , Ronny Jackson (TX-13), Pat Fallon (TX-4), Dan Bishop (NC-9), Yvette Herrell (NM-02) , Richard Hudson (NC-08), Andrew Garbarino (NY-02), Robert B. Aderholt (AL-04), Doug LaMalfa (CA-01), Young Kim (CA-39), Jim Banks (IN-3), Barry Moore (AL-02), Lance Gooden (TX-5), Tom Cole (OK-04), Rodney Davis (IL-13), Nancy Mace (SC-1), Adrian Smith (NE-03), Alex X. Mooney (WV-2), Stephanie Bice (OK-05), Burgess Owens (UT-04), Clay Higgins (LA-03), Van Taylor (TX-03), Beth Van Duyne (TX-24), Elise Stefanik (NY-21), Ted Budd (NC-13), Carol Miller (WV-03), Patrick McHenry (NC-10), Greg Murphy (NC-3), Jake LaTurner (KS-02), Buddy Carter (GA-01), Michael Guest (MS-03), Andy Biggs (AZ-05), Kat Cammack (FL-03), Ken Buck (CO-04), Jody Hice (GA-10), Ann Wager (MO-02), David Valadao (CA-21). Lauren Boebert (CO-03), Garret Graves (LA-06), Scott Perry (PA-10), Tom McClintock (CA-4), Mike Johnson (LA-04), Diana Harshbarger (TN-1), Michael Waltz (FL-06), Paul Gosar (AZ-04), Victoria Spartz (IN-5), Gus M. Bilirakis (FL-12), Guy Reschenthaler (PA-14), Nicole Malliotakis (NY-11), Mark Amodei (NV-2), John Joyce (PA-13), Chuck Fleischmann (TN-03), Bob Good (VA-05), Carlos A. Gimenez (FL-26), Claudia Tenney (NY-22), Maria Elvira Salazar (FL-27), Darrell Issa (CA-50), Scott Fitzgerald (WI-05), Fred Upton (MI-6), Austin Scott (GA-08), Jackie Walorski (IN-2), Tim Burchett (TN-02), Jeff Van Drew (NJ-02), and Mary Miller (IL-15).

###

12 thoughts on “Johnson’s “Keep the Nine” Constitutional Amendment Gains 100 House Cosponsors”

  1. I introduced Senate Concurrent Resolution SCR 602 during this year’s legislative session. It supported Dusty’s resolution for a constitutional amendment to permanently set the membership of the Supreme Court to 9. It passed the Senate 29-2 and the House 60-8. No Republican voted against it and no Democrat voted for it.

  2. I recall the commentariat at dakotawarcollege saying “elections have consequences” when Garland was stonewalled. It appears they do now, too. But now that the shoe is the on the other “LE HORROR! HOW COULD THEY!?!?!?!” It appears the race to the bottom will continue unabated with each side claiming victimhood.

    1. We wouldn’t be so concerned if the liberals wouldn’t try to get anti-constitutionalist, activist “judges” on the court. Just because someone wears a black robe doesn’t mean they are honorable, especially if nominated by a left-wing president.

      If you hate the country, then by all means support packing the court, comrade.

      1. So, start with the assumption that you are right and work backwards to justifying your behavior. Sweet thinking! That’s never gone wrong before! Also, I don’t support court packing, just like I didn’t support stonewalling Garland. Intellectual consistency is fun. You might try it at some point.

      2. Wow, did I kiss something? Justice Thomas meddlingvwherevhe shouldnt. ACB, her religious leaning, and who patched the court, oh, Miscow Mitch cant keep doing what he has been for several years, if the show fits, throw it away!!

  3. Great SCR Senator Stalzer BTW.

    Two reasons Fancy Nancy is saying she doesn’t support the Moon Beam’s PTC bill. She doesn’t have the votes and knows it would be the death quiver in Mid-Terms.

  4. Great SCR BTW Senator Stalzer!

    Two reasons Fancy Nancy is saying she doesn’t support the Moon Beam’s PTC bill. She doesn’t have the votes and knows it would be the death quiver in Mid-Terms.

  5. Honestly – I have no problem with fixing the number of Justices to the number of Judicial Circuits like it was back in the early days of the court. This would bump the number up to 13 members. The actual number of justices isn’t that important. The amount of work that is sent to the court probably DOES warrant adding more members. and if we fix it to something like Judicial Circuits that would mean if the country need to expand to a 14th or 15th circuit at some point in the future, it would automatically expand the court.

    We could keep the number of justices that hear each individual case at 9 and have them draw lots for who hears each case. This would give the members of the court more time to review and hear more cases.

    My big problem with expanding the court as it has been discussed every time since the days of FDR: I don’t think any single President should be the one picking all the new members of the newly expanded court. I don’t care who the President is, having one president pick four would be bad for the country.

    If we bumped the court up to 13 members and had the next four Presidents (or the next four Presidential Administrations, or however we want to break it down) pick ONE justice to expand the court. This would mean that it would be in the 2030’s before the court would be fully staffed.

    1. The whole problem is the liberals appointing anti-constitution activists like Sotomayor and Kagan and the oh-so-revered RBG. People like that don’t care about the constitution, they are more concerned with pushing their own twisted agenda.

      1. OTOH, if only strict constructionalists were appointed, women and minorities wouldn’t be able to vote, and you wouldn’t even have a 2nd Amendment to love and cherish so much.

Comments are closed.