Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.), a longtime influential Democrat in Congress, said Sunday that he supports expanding the Supreme Court from its current nine justices to thirteen.
"Meet the Press" host Kristen Welker asked Clyburn if he agreed with former Vice President Kamala Harris's previous calls for court expansion. "Yes, I do," Clyburn replied. When pressed on a specific number, he stated, "13 is a pretty good number."
Clyburn, who served as House Democratic majority whip for two decades before joining the Senate in 2023 after winning a special election, made the comments during an interview that aired Sunday morning.
The Supreme Court has consisted of nine justices since 1869. The institution's size was set by Congress and has remained unchanged through periods of significant political change. Clyburn's proposal would mark the first attempt to alter the court's composition in over 150 years.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive advocates have renewed calls for court expansion following a series of conservative rulings on abortion, environmental regulation, and executive power during the current court's term.
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) has been among the most vocal proponents of what he calls "court reform." He previously stated that "the only way to restore balance" to the federal judiciary is through structural changes to the Supreme Court.
Organizations including Demand Justice, a progressive advocacy group, have argued that expansion would address what they characterize as an "illegitimate court" resulting from what they call rushed confirmation processes. The group has advocated for adding at least four seats to the bench.
"The American people deserve a Supreme Court that reflects their values and can act as a check on extremism," Demand Justice said in a statement last year.
Supporters contend that expansion is not unprecedented and note that the court previously operated with varying numbers of justices before settling at nine. They argue that Congress has the constitutional authority to set the court's size under Article I.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservatives have largely condemned court expansion proposals as a nakedly partisan maneuver designed to undermine judicial independence.
Senate Minority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) called expansion "court packing" and argued it would destroy the court's legitimacy. "When you start changing the rules because you don't like the outcomes, you're essentially saying the law doesn't matter," Thune said in a statement responding to similar proposals.
Former President Trump's allies have warned that court expansion would represent an existential threat to constitutional balance. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, published analysis arguing that "packing the court would be a radical departure from 150 years of precedent and would fundamentally alter the separation of powers."
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has been particularly outspoken against expansion efforts. "This is about Democrats trying to overturn the results of elections by installing justices who will rule according to their preferences," Hawley wrote on social media.
Critics also point to President Franklin D. Roosevelt's failed 1937 court-packing plan as a historical precedent for why such efforts fail politically. Roosevelt's proposal to add one justice for every sitting member over age 70 was widely criticized as an overreach and contributed to his party's losses in the 1938 midterms.
What the Numbers Show
The Supreme Court has operated with nine justices since 1869, when Congress passed the Judiciary Act of that year. Prior to that, the court had varied between six and ten justices at different points in American history.
The number of justices was first established at six in the Judiciary Act of 1789. It changed several times: increased to seven in 1837, eight in 1863, and reached its historical peak of ten in 1865 before being reduced back to nine in 1869, where it has remained.
Currently, the court consists of six conservative justices appointed by Republican presidents and three liberal justices appointed by Democratic presidents. The ideological balance has shifted significantly since 2016, when Senate Republicans blocked consideration of President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, for nearly a year before the 2016 election.
The court's approval rating stood at 38 percent in recent polling by Gallup, near historic lows. A 2024 Marist College poll found that 54 percent of Americans believed the court should be restructured, though opinions on specific reforms varied widely.
The Bottom Line
Clyburn's comments represent one of the most high-profile endorsements of court expansion from a sitting senator in recent memory. As the debate over judicial reform intensifies, any actual legislation to expand the court would face significant procedural hurdles in Congress and almost certain legal challenges if enacted.
The proposal underscores ongoing tensions between Democrats seeking structural changes to the federal judiciary and Republicans defending the current court's composition. Whether such proposals gain traction depends on electoral outcomes and the broader political environment heading into future elections.