Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg proposed expanding the Supreme Court by six justices on Sunday, arguing that the current bench has become a "nakedly partisan institution" that requires structural reform. Speaking on NBC’s Meet the Press with host Kristen Welker, Buttigieg advocated for increasing the court’s size from nine to fifteen members, a shift that would likely result in a bench with a majority appointed by Democratic presidents.
Buttigieg stated that the goal of the expansion is not merely to add seats for political advantage, but to fundamentally alter how justices are selected to decrease partisan influence. "The idea is not to just add justices for its own sake. The idea is to reform the institution, to make it less partisan," Buttigieg said. This proposal marks a larger expansion than he has previously floated in recent months, signaling a more aggressive stance on judicial reform as he positions himself as a potential 2028 Democratic presidential contender.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive advocates and Buttigieg’s supporters argue that the current Supreme Court lacks legitimacy due to perceived partisan outcomes. Buttigieg has consistently framed the issue as a crisis of confidence, noting in July that public trust in the court had reached its "lowest point in its history." He argues that structural changes, including term limits and a "balanced bench" selection process, are necessary to restore impartiality. In a social media post from July, Buttigieg linked judicial reform to broader economic issues, stating that "kitchen-table problems will only be solvable when we deliver more accountability in government."
The proposal draws on academic frameworks, such as the plan advanced by law professors Daniel Epps and Ganesh Sitaraman, which suggests dividing judges evenly between the parties with a final bloc chosen by consensus. Supporters view this as a way to depoliticize appointments and ensure the court reflects a broader range of legal perspectives rather than the ideology of the appointing president.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservative critics and media outlets characterize Buttigieg’s proposal as "court-packing," a term historically associated with President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s failed attempt to expand the judiciary in the 1930s. Critics argue that adding six justices, who are widely expected to lean Democratic, is a transparent power grab rather than a neutral reform. Daily Wire, in reporting on the proposal, highlighted the political calculus, noting that the expansion would likely shift the ideological balance of the court significantly in favor of the Democratic party.
Opponents also point to previous inaccuracies in Buttigieg’s reform arguments to undermine his credibility. In July, Buttigieg proposed expanding the court to 13 seats to match the "number of districts" in the federal system. Critics noted that the federal judiciary has 94 judicial districts, while the number 13 refers to the appellate circuits. This error was flagged by conservative commentators as evidence that Buttigieg’s understanding of the judicial structure is superficial, suggesting his proposals are driven by political expediency rather than deep legal expertise.
What the Numbers Show
The Supreme Court currently consists of nine justices. Buttigieg’s current proposal would increase this number to 15, adding six new seats. This represents a 66% increase in the size of the bench. Previous iterations of his proposal, made in July, suggested expanding the court to 13 members. The discrepancy between the proposed number (13) and the actual number of federal judicial districts (94) highlights a factual error in his earlier framing, which cited the number of appellate circuits (13) instead.
Public confidence in the Supreme Court has been declining according to recent polling data cited by Buttigieg. While specific percentages were not detailed in the source material, Buttigieg described the current sentiment as the "lowest point in [the court's] history." The proposal for a "balanced bench" involves a mechanism where judges would be divided evenly between the parties, with the final appointments determined by consensus, a model that has not been implemented in the modern era.
The Bottom Line
Buttigieg’s shift to a six-seat expansion signals a hardening of his stance on judicial reform as he explores a 2028 presidential run. While he has not explicitly stated that court expansion would be a top policy priority if elected, his repeated advocacy for structural changes indicates it is a central plank of his platform. The proposal faces significant hurdles in Congress, where Republicans have historically opposed court-packing measures, and in the public sphere, where the term carries negative connotations for many voters. The upcoming election cycle will likely see judicial reform become a more prominent issue as Democrats seek to address the court’s conservative supermajority.
It remains unclear whether Buttigieg’s proposal will gain traction within the broader Democratic party or if it will be used by opponents to portray him as out of touch with the judiciary’s institutional norms. The error in his July remarks regarding judicial districts may continue to be a point of contention for critics seeking to question his preparedness for high-level governance.