Thread by @mcpli

Now moving on to the opening plenary session about the promises - and perils - of court reform. #ACS2019 1/

With a great line up on panelists. #ACS2019 2/

.@Dahlialithwick on why we are having this discussion: “Because we went into the 2016 election with three octogenarians on the Court and one side didn’t make the Court the singular focus of the election.” #ACS2019 3/

.@JoanBiskupic jumps in to note that Merrick Garland’s name wasn’t mentioned at all at the 2016 Democratic convention. #ACS2019 4/

On the substance of reform, @AaronBelkin argues that of the reform proposals out there, simply expanding the court is the least risky option. #ACS2019 5/

.@GaneshSitaraman now talking about his 5-5-5 court plan - which @PeteButtigieg has talked about. #ACS2019 6/

More on the 5-5-5 plan here: google.com/amp/s/www.nbcn… #ACS2019 7/

.@Lawyerbobbauer now making the case for 18 year SCOTUS terms. Under that system every president would get chance to make some appointments. Notes the historical anomaly that Jimmy Carter got zero SCOTUS appointments. #ACS2019 8/

.@aziz_huq with the really interesting point that court appointments are the constitutional province of two not particularly representative organs: POTUS (elected via the Electoral College) and a Senate that gives outsized power to small states. #ACS2019 9/

.@aziz_huq argues that this isn’t an acccident. It was part of the Framers’ design - intended to protect property and the status quo. #ACS2019 10/

Which raises all kinds of structural thoughts about how we appoint judges. #ACS2019 11/

.@NeilScottSiegel argues the case against SCOTUS reform. Worries that all the talk of sweeping reform will basically be an argument to conservatives about why they need to re-elect President Trump. #ACS2019 12/

.@NeilScottSiegel says reform proposals are all unlikely to ever become the law of the land and out of proportion to problem at hand. With a slightly different politics, he says not hard to imagine a Democratic SCOTUS majority within eight years. #ACS2019 13/

.@aziz_huq makes the case for a different kind of court reform - narrowing the jurisdiction of federal courts so that conservatives don’t get second and third bite at the apple when they lose in the legislative process. #ACS2019 14/

.@aziz_huq’s point is that the current power that we give to SCOTUS and the federal courts more generally is a choice - but not something that is inherent in the structure of the Constitution. #ACS2019 15/

.@NeilScottSiegel pushes back and suggests that stripping the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court could be unconstitutional. Likewise says there are potential constitutional challenges to other court expansion proposals. #ACS2019 16/

.@aziz_huq: “At this point, what we just don’t know is how committed Republicans actually are to the project of democracy.” Says thinking about courts has to take place with that uncertainty in the background. #ACS2019 17/

.@AaronBelkin says the any talk of court reform has to take place simultaneously along side with talk of broader democracy reforms, such AVR and other reforms in H.R. 1. Says important to think about problem broadly. #ACS2019 18/

And that’s a wrap. There have been ACS panels on court reform in the past, but the issue always seemed somewhat academic. Suffice it to say, this year it feels very real and urgent. #ACS2019 19/