Hirtory And Repeating History

 https://x.com/bskimike22802/status/2054267778312425797?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

 "The next Democratic White House does not need a court reform commission like some college seminar. We need action. We need term limits for Justices. We need to expand this morally bankrupt Court from 9 to 13."

 

Ro Khanna 

"@TaxRichNow

Congratulations. You just handed me the history lesson and called it a rebuttal. Yes, the number changed -- six times in eighty years -- mostly to add circuit seats as the country expanded westward. Practical. Proportional. Not "we lost some rulings, so let us manufacture a majority." But you want the ONE blatantly political example? 1866. Radical Republicans slashed the court to SEVEN seats specifically to stop Andrew Johnson from filling vacancies. Historians have a name for that move. It is not a flattering one. Then they handed Ulysses Grant nine seats two years later. How convenient. It has been nine justices since 1869. One hundred fifty-seven years. Not because the Constitution carves it in stone -- it does not. Because every serious person who studied that ugly little history decided that a bench resized on political demand is not a court. It is a trophy. You found a historical footnote, declared victory, and walked away without explaining HOW that footnote produces your conclusion. That reasoning error has a Latin name: non sequitur. The existence of past political manipulation is the ARGUMENT AGAINST doing it again, not the permission slip for it. The history you cited is the cautionary tale. You thought it was the green light."