Harris supports the campaign to block Trump’s Supreme Court picks

Harris heralds a fundraiser by Josh Orton, the Dark Lord Money group “Demand Justice” (best known for her campaign to have Justice Stephen Breyer resign). The “demand for justice” has prompted a radical agenda, including court mobilization.

In a post on X, Harris highlighted the New York Times condition About “the liberal organization… preparing a multi-million dollar effort to oppose potential Trump Supreme Court appointees before that happens.”

Former Vice President Kamala Harris speaks during a campaign rally at Jenison Field House on the campus of Michigan State University on November 3, 2024, in East Lansing, Michigan. (AP Photo/Jacqueline Martin)

“The project will cost $3 million to start and another $15 million if there are vacancies,” Orton announced. The group explicitly indicated the possibility of this happening Justices Clarence Thomas (77) and Samuel Alito (76) retired.

Harris urged people to weigh in, saying: “We must be clear about what is at stake with the Supreme Court right now. We cannot allow Donald Trump to choose one, if not two, additional justices. The highest court in the land must be prevented from becoming more beholden to him.”

Blackburn calls for an investigation into Judge Jackson over his appearance at the Grammys praising anti-Ice rhetoric

Harris It is said The party supports court packing and could use extremist groups such as Demand Justice to advance expansion of the court to produce an immediate liberal majority if Democrats seize power.

Harris is right about one thing. This is a clear-eyed and ruthless strategy on the part of the left to remove an obstacle to a similarly radical agenda.

Judge Jackson is causing an internet uproar after being linked to a wallet theft in Japan

years agoHarvard professor Michael Klarman laid out a radical agenda to change the system to ensure that Republicans “never win another election.” But he warned that “the Supreme Court could overturn everything I just described.” Therefore, the court must be prepared in advance to allow these changes to occur.

In the same way, Democratic strategist James Carville He explained How this process of how the Package to Energy plan will work will work.

“I’ll tell you what happens,” Carville said. “A Democrat will be elected in 2028. You know it, I know it. The Democratic President will announce a special transition advisory committee on Supreme Court reform.

“They’re going to recommend reducing the number of Supreme Court justices from nine to 13. That’s going to happen, folks.”

During an episode of his podcast on Thursday, Democratic strategist James Carville encouraged his party to focus on hitting the GOP over the “big, beautiful bill” and not get caught up in woke issues. (Screenshot/Podcast “Political War Room”)

Former Attorney General Eric Hall calls on Democrats to focus on expanding the Supreme Court and its term limits

The rhetoric of this renewed push to pack the court and the war chests on the left remains completely unconnected with the actual record of conservatives on the court, who have been repeatedly attacked by President Trump for voting against major cases involving the administration. From the tariff decision to the expected ruling on birthright citizenship, conservative justices have routinely voted against the administration.

Moreover, the vast majority of opinions on the court remain unanimous or near unanimous. Ideological division on the Court only appears on relatively few occasions per term. While these cases have significant impacts, they are not a strictly or automatically divided court in most cases. Indeed, liberal judges did so He was pushed back On the left, they call for court packing or describe the court as conservative or ideological.

However, Harris continues to rally donors and voters with claims of “Activist” court.

Jonathan Turley: Judge Jackson plays critic to the dismay of his SCOTUS colleagues

What is most surprising about Harris’s “clear-eyed” leadership is that her model of New Justice appears to be Biden’s only candidate. Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Both conservative and liberal justices have publicly criticized Jackson in his previous opinions. Jackson has criticized her colleagues while adopting the analysis that would do just that Effectively gut areas such as First Amendment jurisprudence.

The justices of the US Supreme Court stand before their officiant in Washington, D.C. on October 7, 2022. (Olivier Daulieri/AFP via Getty Images)

Many of us found Jackson’s views unnerving and disturbing. However, liberal groups and Harris want to replicate their approach to jurisprudence, suggesting not just a crowded court but a court populated by unfettered jurists.

Click here to download the FOX NEWS app

For her part, Judge Jackson shocked many with her active support of Harris in her presidential bid. Jackson publicly praised her nomination for ABC’s The View as “historicAnd something that “gives a lot of people hope.”

With millions raised and extremist groups preparing themselves for a court-packing campaign, there are many who see Harris’ second nomination as a reason for “hope.” For the rest of us, it’s not just a matter of “clear vision,” but an unadulterated fear of what might await this country if this strategy succeeds in the years ahead.

Click here to read more from Jonathan Turley