I'd like to be able to call this shocking or even mildly surprising, but it's not as if the Democrats haven't been telegraphing their punches on this issue for years. We were openly warned by the liberals that if they took back full control of Congress that they planned on packing the Supreme Court to dilute the power of the current conservative majority on the bench. But Senator Ron Wyden (D) of Oregon has pulled the trigger a bit earlier than even I had anticipated. Wyden introduced a bill on Thursday that would immediately pack the nation's highest court with six more justices while imposing new restrictions on the rules governing the actions of SCOTUS. Called the "Judicial Modernization and Transparency Act," the measure would force the justices to publicly disclose their tax returns and introduce a new "code of conduct" in the name of transparency or something related to that. It's an election-year stunt, to be sure, but it also offers a blueprint as to what we can expect if they sweep the elections this fall. (Townhall)

Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat, introduced a bill on Thursday that would expand the Supreme Court by adding six more justices.

The bill, the Judicial Modernization and Transparency Act, would also force the justices to have their tax returns publicly disclosed. 

According to a press release from Wyden’s office, the bill will “restore balance among the three branches of government, increase transparency to improve public trust in America’s courts, and modernize the courts to ensure greater access to justice for more Americans” 

Wyden further claimed that this measure would "improve transparency around potential financial conflicts and other unethical behavior." That might sound good on paper to those with a particular mindset when it comes to "balance" in the judicial system, but it comes with some persistent, nagging questions. Wyden is talking about regulating the highest level of the judicial branch. This concept immediately runs afoul of several key tenets of the Constitution. 

It's not that the number of justices on the court can't be changed. That's happened several times over the course of the nation's history. But once the justices are seated, they are responsible for setting the rules of order that govern their actions. It may prove to be of interest to the American people to have more transparency when it comes to the various financial records of the justices, but the final decision is in their court. (Both literally and figuratively.) If they wish to implement a code of conduct upon themselves they are free to do so, but only by their own consent.

As far as imposing term limits, that too runs into a brick wall since the "term limits" for SCOTUS justices are set forth right in the Constitution. Article III, Section 1 states that Supreme Court justices serve "during good behavior." There are no term limits mentioned. This puts the Democrats' proposal at odds with the founding documents. And who is it that determines how to resolve such a conflict when one arises? The Supreme Court does. That sticks a rather large pin in the balloon of Wyden's bill before it even gets off the ground.

Packing the court in this fashion should properly be seen as a vast overreach of the power of Congress. Wyden is claiming that the nation's faith in the Supreme Court has cratered of late, but that's true of every branch of government and many other formerly esteemed institutions. The one stinging bit of irony in all of this is found in the possibility that Wyden's bill could somehow pass and survive the inevitable challenges that would follow. Stop and consider what would happen if that were to take place and then Donald Trump turned around and won the election. He would immediately set about packing the court with a half dozen more conservative justices. Picturing the egg on Wyden's face at that point is simply hilarious.