Do I Support Supreme Court Packing, and Who Actually Started It?

Do I Support Supreme Court Packing, and Who Actually Started It?

From Purple Political Breakdown by Radell Lewis

July 2, 2026 · 1h 28m · Episode 167

About this episode

Radell Lewis explores the complexities of Supreme Court packing and its historical context.

This week is a different kind of Purple Political Breakdown: a solo, chat-driven deep dive on one question. Do you support packing the Supreme Court? Before you answer, Radell Lewis walks the entire board, because the honest version of this debate starts earlier than most coverage admits. You do not need new seats to pack a court if you control who fills the seats you already have. In 2016, Justice Scalia dies and Mitch McConnell blocks Merrick Garland for nearly a year on a "let the voters decide" standard he branded the "Biden rule." In 2020, weeks before the election, he reverses himself and confirms Amy Coney Barrett after tens of millions of Americans have already voted. The frame other coverage skips: the Garland blockade and the Barrett rush were already a form of packing the existing nine through procedure. From there, the history that undercuts the idea that nine is sacred. The number is not in the Constitution. Article III leaves it to Congress, which has changed it seven times, from six justices in 1789, to Lincoln adding a tenth seat in 1863, to the nine we have settled on since 1869. Then the cautionary tale: FDR's 1937 plan to add up to six justices died 70 to 20 in…

More episodes of Purple Political Breakdown

Explore listener stats, chart rankings, contacts and more on the Purple Political Breakdown podcast page.