Fox News legal analyst Jonathan Turley warned Monday that renewed Democratic discussions about expanding the Supreme Court represent a dangerous threat to the nation’s constitutional system.
Turley made the comments while discussing recent remarks from former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who suggested that a 13-member Supreme Court could mirror the structure of the federal judiciary.
Speaking on Fox News, Turley criticized Buttigieg for what he described as political pandering and argued that proposals to expand the court are designed to change its ideological makeup rather than improve the judicial system.
“He went before an audience and had to offer them something, so he offered them up the United States Supreme Court, perhaps the single most important institution in this country’s constitutional system,” Turley said.
Turley disputed Buttigieg’s reasoning that a 13-member Supreme Court would reflect the federal court structure.
“He’s wrong,” Turley said.
“This wouldn’t reflect the district court system.”
“I think he’s referring to the circuit courts, the fact that there are 13 of them, but that’s the extent of that analysis.”
The legal scholar then broadened his criticism to what he described as a growing movement among some academics and political commentators advocating major constitutional changes.
“What is really troubling here, and I go into this in my book, ‘Rage and the Republic,’ is that at our 250th anniversary, pundits and professors are calling to trash the Constitution or make radical changes,” Turley said.
According to Turley, some advocates of Supreme Court expansion view the judiciary as an obstacle to policy goals they support.
He argued that proposals to increase the number of justices are often tied to efforts to secure favorable rulings on controversial issues.
“And as I discuss in the book, they openly talk about the need to guarantee, once they retake power, never to lose it again,” Turley said.
He pointed to comments from unnamed academics who have argued that certain policy priorities cannot survive judicial review under the current court.
“One Harvard professor said, ‘Look, all the things we’re talking about here are not going to get through the Supreme Court. So, we have to take over the Supreme Court,’” Turley said.
Turley argued that many of the proposals favored by some progressives would face constitutional challenges and that court expansion is being promoted as a way to overcome those obstacles.
“So that’s what we’re talking about here,” he said.
“And they’re trying to condition voters that it is worth guaranteeing us power to trade off core institutions like the court.”
During the segment, Fox News anchor John Roberts also played clips of prominent Democrats criticizing recent Supreme Court decisions.
Turley said there is an important distinction between historical changes to the size of the court and what he described as modern court-packing proposals.
“There’s a difference between expanding the court gradually, and what these Democrats are talking about, which is packing the court,” Turley said.
He argued that the purpose of adding additional justices would be to alter outcomes in future cases.
“Adding four liberal justices to flip the result of cases,” he said.
Turley specifically cited issues such as race-based policies and proposals for a federal wealth tax as examples of measures he believes supporters would seek to advance through a restructured court.
He maintained that efforts to expand the Supreme Court for political purposes would weaken public confidence in the judiciary and damage one of the nation’s most important institutions.
“This whole list of items that the Democrats want to do to guarantee power require them to take this hostile move against the court,” Turley said.
He concluded by warning that political leaders should consider the long-term consequences of altering foundational institutions for short-term political gain.
“And these are people who are showing that they are politicians who can’t think beyond the next election, let alone the next generation,” Turley said.
“And it is dangerous.”
