Thread by @jedshug

The Court question should be disentangled into at least 2 questions:
1) What is the right size for a Supreme Court?
(Is it 9? No.)
2) What is the right method for judicial selection?
(The current model? Hell no.)

If we are going to change one, change both in a balanced way.

I have concerns about the @danepps @GaneshSitaraman 5/5/5 proposal, because I think the existing conservative Justices will play hardball harder.
But it moves the debate forward by thinking creatively about both questions, and I haven’t seen anything better that addresses both.

For what it’s worth, I suggest:
1) President nominate 1 Justice every 2 years (2 per 4 yr term)...
Let size increase. No term limits.

2) But with a statutory merit model of bipartisan House committee (perhaps with input of governors, the bar...) creating a short list/slate.

Benefits: Deaths and retirements do not open up seats.
Blocking a nominee like Garland does not leave a seat open.
Every presidential election = 2 Justices.
More Justices decreases the political salience and power of each seat, cc: @marinklevy

Also for what is worth, I have been publicly saying the Court was too small and should be expanded since the G W Bush administration, and I generally endorsed merit selection in my book during Obama’s first term (but hadn’t spelled all this out yet).