Harris backs Demand Justice’s push to block Trump Supreme Court picks

Former Vice President Kamala Harris is rallying Democratic donors to oppose “additional judges” who could be appointed by President Donald Trump “before they are nominated.” Harris announces the fundraiser led by Josh Orton, president of the dark money group Demand Justice (made famous for his campaign to force Justice Stephen Breyer to resign). Demand Justice pushed a radical agenda, including referral to the courts.

In a job on

Former Vice President Kamala Harris speaks during a campaign rally at Jenison Field House on the campus of Michigan State University, Sunday, Nov. 3, 2024, in East Lansing, Michigan. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

Orton announced that “the project would cost $3 million to start and $15 million more if vacancies occur.” The group specifically raised the possibility of Justices Clarence Thomas (77) and Samuel Alito (76) retiring.

Harris urged people to contribute, posting this:

BLACKBURN DEMANDS INVESTIGATION OF JUSTICE JACKSON FOR GRAMMY APPEARANCE APPLAUDING ANTI-ICE RHETORIC

“We must be clear about the current challenges of the Supreme Court. We cannot allow Donald Trump to choose one, or even two, additional justices. We must prevent the highest court in the land from becoming even more beholden to him.”

Harris reportedly favors judicial consolidation and could use radical groups like Demand Justice to force an expansion of the Court to produce an immediate liberal majority if Democrats take power.

Harris is right about one thing. This is a clear-eyed and ruthless strategy by the left to remove an obstacle to an equally radical agenda.

JUSTICE JACKSON CAUSES ONLINE TROUBLE AFTER LINKING BIRTH RIGHT CITIZENSHIP WITH WALLET THEFT IN JAPAN

Years ago, Harvard professor Michael Klarman laid out a radical agenda to change the system to ensure that Republicans “never win another election.” However, he warned that “the Supreme Court could overturn everything I have just described.” Therefore, the terrain must be filled in advance to allow for these changes.

Similarly, Democratic strategist James Carville explained how this process of running the pack-to-power plan would work:

“I’ll tell you what’s going to happen. A Democrat is going to be elected in 2028. You know it. I know it. The Democratic president is going to announce the creation of a special transition advisory committee on Supreme Court reform. They’re going to recommend that the number of Supreme Court justices increase from nine to 13. It’s going to happen, my friends.”

During an episode of his podcast Thursday, Democratic strategist James Carville warned his party to focus on hitting the GOP on the “big, beautiful bill” and not get distracted by woke issues. (Screenshot/“Politics War Room” Podcast)

FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER CALLS ON DEMOCRATS TO FOCUS ON SUPREME COURT EXPANSION AND TERM LIMITS

The rhetoric of this new campaign in favor of packing the courts and the left’s war chests remains entirely unrelated to the actual record of conservatives on the Court, who have been repeatedly attacked by President Trump for voting against major administration cases. From the ruling on tariffs to the expected ruling on birthright citizenship, conservative justices have routinely voted against the administration.

Furthermore, the vast majority of opinions on the Court remain unanimous or almost unanimous. Ideological division within the Court is present in relatively few cases each term. While these cases certainly have significant impacts, in most cases they are not a rigidly or robotically divided court. Indeed, liberal justices have pushed back against the left by calling for judicial packaging or characterizing the Court as conservative or ideological.

Yet Harris continues to rally donors and voters by claiming it is an “activist” court.

JONATHAN TURLEY: JUSTICE JACKSON PLAYS A PUNDIT TO THE CONSTERN OF SCOTUS COLLEAGUES

What is most striking about Harris’s “lucid” leadership is that her model for a new justice appears to be Biden’s only nominee, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. Conservative and liberal justices have publicly criticized Jackson in past opinions. Jackson attacked his colleagues while adopting an analysis that would effectively gut areas such as First Amendment jurisprudence.

U.S. Supreme Court justices pose for their official photo at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC, October 7, 2022. (OLIVIER DOULIERY/AFP via Getty Images)

Many of us found Jackson’s views disconcerting and unbalanced. However, liberal groups and Harris would like to replicate his approach to jurisprudence, suggesting not only a crowded court, but also a court populated by unbridled jurists.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

For her part, Judge Jackson shocked many by actually supporting Harris in her presidential campaign. Jackson publicly hailed his appointment on ABC’s The View as “historic” and something that “gives a lot of people hope.”

With millions raised and radical groups positioning themselves for a legal campaign, many see a second Harris nomination as cause for “hope.” For the rest of us, it’s not just about being clear-eyed, but also about an unwavering fear of what could await this country if this strategy succeeds in the years to come.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM JONATHAN TURLEY