www.zerohedge.com 
Update (1617ET): In the latest round of malarkey over whether or not Biden will pack the Supreme Court (he will), the former Vice President confidently said on Saturday that filling the current vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court is unconstitutional.
“Look, the only court-packing is going on right now. It’s going on with the Republicans packing the court now. It’s not constitutional what they’re doing,” said Biden while traveling to Pennsylvania for a campaign stop.
“The fact is that the only packing going on is this court is being packed now by the Republicans after the vote has already begun,” he added. “I’m going to stay focused on it so we don’t take our eyes off the ball here.”
As Politico‘s Jake Sherman asks: “What’s not constitutional here?”
Watch:
What’s not constitutional here? https://t.co/PvX8sC0aNp
— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) October 10, 2020
Will some brave journalist ask Biden to elaborate?
* * *
Update (1500ET): On the insaneness of modern politics amplifier, things just went to ’11’, when presidential candidate Joe Biden told a reporter, who asked him the question everyone wants answered currently – “will you stack the courts?” – that voters “don’t deserve” to know his stance until after the election…
Asked if voters deserve to know if he would pack the Supreme Court, Biden says “No, they don’t deserve” to. pic.twitter.com/uig5d14tsH
— Arthur Schwartz (@ArthurSchwartz) October 10, 2020
You cannot make this up!
* * *
In a rather stunning admission of malarkey, Joe Biden told a group of so-called ‘reporters’ this week, “You’ll know my opinion on court-packing when the election is over.”
But, we already know Joe’s “opinion” on packing the courts – he thinks it’s a “bonehead idea.”
As David Harsanyi reminds us, via RealClearPolitics, President Franklin Roosevelt revived a Woodrow Wilson plan to arbitrarily place political allies into the courts, one for every judge over 70 years old, which would have meant 50 additional political allies on the federal bench, and six additional Supreme Court justices. Like today’s Democrats, he first softened up the public by attempting to delegitimize the Court — claiming, for instance, that the justices were incompetent geriatric cases incapable of performing their duties. (It is somewhat ironic that the most reliably pro-New Deal justice at the time, Louis Brandeis, was the only octogenarian on the Court.)
In those days, there were still enough politicians who valued the separation of powers to stop him.
Of the 10 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee who signed a document opposing FDR’s scheme, seven were Democrats.
They didn’t merely maintain that FDR was wrong or misguided; they argued that the court-packing plan was an “utterly dangerous abandonment of constitutional principle,” a transparent scheme to punish justices whose opinions diverged from the executive branch, and “an invasion of judicial power such as has never before been attempted in this country.”
If enacted, the senators wrote, court-packing would create a “vicious precedent which must necessarily undermine our system.” They concluded that the plan “should be so emphatically rejected that its parallel will never again be presented to the free representatives of the free people of America.”
FDR, whose popularity would plummet to historic lows after the court-packing threat, ultimately went on to appoint eight justices, and to largely have his way in fundamentally changing American governance. But he was prevented from destroying the Court as an institution, and modern-day Democrats are now seeking to finish that job.
Wit that as background, fast forward to a 1983 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on whether to allow President Ronald Reagan to replace members of the Commission on Civil Rights.
Specifically, as The Washington Free Beacon detailed, Biden opposed the nominated commissioners not because he viewed them as unqualified, but because he thought Reagan’s takeover of the commission would damage its legitimacy.
He compared it to Roosevelt’s court-packing push, which he called a “terrible, terrible mistake.”
“President Roosevelt clearly had the right to send to the United States Senate and the United States Congress a proposal to pack the Court,” Biden said during the hearing. “It was totally within his right to do that—he violated no law, he was legalistically absolutely correct.”
“But it was a bonehead idea. It was a terrible, terrible mistake to make, and it put in question, for an entire decade, the independence of the most significant body—including the Congress in my view—the most significant body in this country, the Supreme Court of the United States of America.”
In his own words…
Of course, the real question is – especially given Pelosi’s unveiling of a 25th Amendment-seeking panel this week – will a President Joe Biden have anything to do with the decision to pack the courts as he is ousted for a leftist revolution and one of the gravest threats to the constitutional order in modern American history?
“We are on the verge of a crisis of confidence in the Supreme Court,” Kamala Harris said last year following the Justice Kavanaugh hearings.
“We have to take this challenge head on, and everything is on the table to do that.”
As Andrew Wynne ominously concluded, forgive us if we’re rightfully skeptical that Biden will stand up to the radical left when they ram through Congress an institution-crumbling, court-packing scheme.