Supreme 13

Supreme 13

@supreme13.org

Supreme 13 advocates expanding the U.S. Supreme Court to 13 justices. Research, endorsements, news, and commentary at supreme13.org ⚖️

557 followers730 following2.3K posts

Pinned

Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

Who supports expanding the U.S. Supreme Court? Supreme 13 tracks documented endorsements (as of 10/21/26): ⚖️ 9 U.S. Senators ⚖️ 81 U.S. Representatives ⚖️ 4 State Democratic Parties ⚖️ 40 Organizations Explore the Endorsements Tracker and its sources: supreme13.org/endorsements/

supreme13.orgSupreme Court Expansion Endorsements | Supreme 13Explore documented support for expanding the U.S. Supreme Court from senators, representatives, state Democratic parties, and organizations.
Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

Think the Constitution requires nine Supreme Court justices? Think again! It establishes “one supreme Court,” but Congress sets the number and has changed it repeatedly. So why not 13? Check out what the Constitution and history actually say: supreme13.org/the-constitu...

supreme13.orgThe Constitutionality of Expanding the Supreme CourtLearn why expanding the U.S. Supreme Court from nine to thirteen justices would not require a constitutional amendment and how Congress can do it by statute.
Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

"We can’t clean up Washington without restoring integrity to the Supreme Court. That’s why I believe we should expand the Supreme Court to 13 justices. And then, institute term limits. Because an appointment to the Supreme Court shouldn’t mean a lifetime lack of accountability."

Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

"One that gives working parents and millionaire executives the same fair shake. This extremist court has shown that it is not interested in advancing the equal administration of justice. It’s time to rebalance the Supreme Court to create one that is."

Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

"Engraved on the entrance of the Supreme Court is a simple phrase: “equal justice under law.” Americans deserve a court committed to that fundamental idea. One that values the settled constitutional rights of every American. One that protects democracy, instead of undermining it."

Supreme 13 reposted

Liz Dye
@lizdye.bsky.social

NINETY-ONE PAGES in the US v CA voter purge case? With a per curiam order and each judge on the Ninth Circuit panel writing a separate concurrence/dissent? I mean, I'm glad they came out right. But, tighten up, boys! storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

storage.courtlistener.com#63 in United States of America v. State of California, et al. (9th Cir., 26-7070) – CourtListener.comORDER FOR PUBLICATION FILED. (Mark J. BENNETT, Patrick J. BUMATAY, Gabriel P. SANCHEZ) (Concurrence by Judge BENNETT; Concurrence by Judge SANCHEZ; Dissent by Judge BUMATAY) [SEE ORDER FOR FULL TEXT] ...

Supreme 13 reposted

Rick Hasen
@rickhasen.bsky.social

Replying to @rickhasen.bsky.social

Here's the topline of my analysis on this afternoon's 2-1 Ninth Circuit ruling in the California ballot case:

Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

"I also urge the Senate to end the filibuster and pass the Judiciary Act to expand the Supreme Court to ensure that we maintain the rights we have now and that any laws we pass are protected from the ideological and extreme current Supreme Court majority."

Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

"We must continue to fight on all fronts against this all-out assault on reproductive rights, that includes a need to make the right to an abortion federal law."

Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

"Republicans could argue that expanding a state supreme court — and expanding the federal one — are radically different things, and thus, that their divergent views on the propriety of each are rooted in neutral principles of just procedure, not political expediency."

Supreme 13 reposted

Rachel Shelden
@rachelshelden.bsky.social

It cannot be stressed enough that adjusting the size of the Supreme Court in the 19th c. was a serious solution to serious concerns about how the Court functioned. As @earlymodjustice.bsky.social points out, reform often addressed imbalances. And these imbalances were often about REPRESENTATION. 1/

Holly Brewer@earlymodjustice.bsky.social

Seven times between 1801 and 1869 Congress changed the size of the court, going from a low of five justices in 1801 to a high of ten in 1863. In most of those cases, as in 1801 and 1863, the size went up and down in order to fix an imbalance or overreach by the Supreme Court. My latest

newrepublic.comThe Case for Expanding the Supreme Court Has Never Been StrongerBiden has repeatedly refused to endorse “court-packing.” The right-wing justices’ ruling on presidential immunity ought to change his mind.

Supreme 13 reposted

Strict Scrutiny Podcast
@strictscrutiny.bsky.social

Replying to @strictscrutiny.bsky.social

You can get Rachel Shelden’s new book THE POLITICAL SUPREME COURT: A Forgotten History from our friends at bookshop. Check it out! bookshop.org/p/books/the-...

bookshop.orgThe Political Supreme Court: A Forgotten HistoryToday's Supreme Court justices bristle at the label "politicians in robes," insisting that they operate above the fray of partisan politics. But for the first century of the nation's history, the Cour...
Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

"Under the next Democratic administration, we must end a tyrannical Court majority that does nothing but hand more power to the already-powerful."

Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

"Across several news outlets this week, Demand Justice made the case for Supreme Court expansion and the dire legitimacy crisis the Court faces after years of attacking Americans’ fundamental rights and further entrenching the oligarchy."

Supreme 13 reposted

Dan Froomkin/Press Watch/Heads Up News
@froomkin.bsky.social

Leaders of the No Kings movement are already gearing up for the next major grassroots campaign: Making sure congressional Democrats don’t wimp out. My first piece at @newrepublic.com! (Reposted to update link card) newrepublic.com/article/2168...

newrepublic.comThe No Kings Movement Is Already Planning for 2028The leaders of the groups massing under the banner of “the resistance” have an audacious agenda for a Democratic Congress—and they tell The New Republic that they are ready to fight for it.

Supreme 13 reposted

Greg Sargent
@gregsargent.bsky.social

Not too early to start thinking about how grassroots pressure on a Dem House could help produce better results -->

Dan Froomkin/Press Watch/Heads Up News@froomkin.bsky.social

Leaders of the No Kings movement are already gearing up for the next major grassroots campaign: Making sure congressional Democrats don’t wimp out. My first piece at @newrepublic.com! (Reposted to update link card) newrepublic.com/article/2168...

newrepublic.comThe No Kings Movement Is Already Planning for 2028The leaders of the groups massing under the banner of “the resistance” have an audacious agenda for a Democratic Congress—and they tell The New Republic that they are ready to fight for it.
Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

”We need to codify Roe, and we need to expand the Supreme Court to do it, but we need to win this Senate seat and make sure we get all that done,” said Charles Booker.

Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

"Congress must take action to push back against the corruption that is impeding economic mobility for Black communities with this verdict and the overturning of affirmative action, and take necessary steps to expand the Supreme Court now."

Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

“Today the Supreme Court made the decision to saddle millions of families, a disproportionate number of whom are Black borrowers, with insurmountable debt with no path forward toward reconciliation."

Supreme 13 reposted

Eric Segall
@espinsegall.bsky.social

It is interesting watching so many people fight for Supreme Court reform because of how terrible the justices are instead of because of the fundamentally broken structure of the institution. Don’t ever give a gov’t official official largely unreviewable power for life. Doesn’t matter who they are.

Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

Is expanding the Supreme Court constitutional? Would it take an amendment? What about term limits, legitimacy, or “court-packing”? Fair questions. And they deserve real answers. See how the arguments stack up. Check out the FAQs: supreme13.org/faqs/

supreme13.orgFrequently Asked Questions About Supreme Court Expansion | Supreme 13Answers to common questions about expanding the U.S. Supreme Court to 13 justices, including its legality, history, objections, alternatives, and path forward.
Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

“We have to expand the Supreme Court. And let’s just expand it to 13. We have 13 circuit courts, let's have 13 justices.”

Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

Why 13 Supreme Court justices? • We have 13 federal courts of appeals • Congress can change the Court's size • The Constitution doesn't require nine justices • To restore balance, reflect the nation, and rebuild trust So why stick with nine? See the case for 13 and who's on board! supreme13.org

supreme13.orgExpand the Supreme Court to 13 Justices | Supreme 13Supreme 13 advocates expanding the U.S. Supreme Court from 9 to 13 justices to restore balance, better reflect the nation, and rebuild public trust.
Supreme 13
@supreme13.org

"He has called for abolishing ICE, breaking up pharmacy benefit managers, canceling all $220 billion in U.S. medical debt, imposing term limits on Supreme Court justices, expanding the court, and impeaching former President Donald Trump and his cabinet."