Rep. Jim Clyburn has thrown his support behind expanding the Supreme Court to 13 justices and admitted he regrets backing Clarence Thomas’s confirmation, drawing fresh attention to the left’s push to reshape the nation’s highest court.
During a recent appearance on NBC News’s “Meet the Press,” Rep. Jim Clyburn, a senior Democrat from South Carolina, said Congress should take “significant actions” by expanding the Supreme Court from nine to 13 justices. Clyburn’s remarks put him squarely in the camp of progressive voices calling for so-called “court packing”, an idea that remains deeply divisive among voters and lawmakers alike.
Clyburn described the current Supreme Court as having “decided to reverse course and take this country back,” pointing to a broader liberal frustration with the Court’s direction in recent years. He suggested that increasing the number of justices would bring the Court back in line with what he sees as the country’s constitutional values. “And 13 is a pretty good number. A baker's dozen would be a good number to have on the court,” he said, adding, “I would hope we would get people on the court who will follow the constitutional underpinnings of this great nation of ours.”
The proposal to expand the Supreme Court has been circulating in Democratic circles, especially among the party’s left wing. Clyburn’s endorsement is notable given his stature within the party and his influence on national policy debates. The report also notes that former Vice President Kamala Harris previously floated the idea of raising the number of justices to 13, further underlining the push from high-profile Democrats.
Clyburn did not outline a specific legislative process or timetable for implementing the plan, nor did he reference any current Congressional action on the issue. Congress would need to pass a law to change the number of justices, and there is no indication from the reporting that such legislation is imminent.
In the same interview, Clyburn reflected on his role in supporting Clarence Thomas during the 1991 Supreme Court confirmation hearings, support he now describes as a mistake. “You know, I have made mistakes in my life, and that's one that I made, and I will own up to that mistake,” Clyburn said. He explained that his initial support for Thomas was based on “faith and confidence in the fact that his background and experiences would instruct him in his professionalism, especially sitting on the bench.” But Clyburn now says he misjudged Thomas’s judicial approach, pointing specifically to civil rights concerns.
“I thought that he would follow those court decisions that upheld the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act. I had no idea that Clarence Thomas would rebel the way he has against his own background and experiences,” Clyburn said. The congressman’s regret mirrors broader disappointment among Democrats who once hoped Thomas would rule differently on key civil rights issues.
Thomas, who was confirmed to the Court in 1991, has not responded publicly to Clyburn’s comments, and the reporting does not include any statement from the justice. The source also does not specify which Supreme Court decisions prompted Clyburn’s disillusionment or whether any new action is expected from Congress in response to his remarks.
Calls to expand the Supreme Court have become louder on the left as the Court has issued rulings that many liberals view as setbacks for progressive policy goals. Clyburn’s endorsement of a 13-member Court adds fuel to arguments that Democrats should use their power to reshape federal institutions when they dislike the outcome of constitutional order. The number of justices has stood at nine for over 150 years, and proposals to increase it are seen by critics as a direct threat to the Court’s independence and legitimacy.
Clyburn’s statement that Congress should add four new justices, bringing the total to a “baker’s dozen”, reflects a willingness among certain Democratic leaders to upend long-standing norms. Yet as of now, there is no evidence in the reporting that Congress is moving forward with such a plan, nor is there any detail on how additional justices would be selected or how the Court’s operation would change.
While some Democrats insist that expanding the Court is necessary to reverse what they see as regressive decisions, voters have consistently shown skepticism toward court-packing schemes. The debate over the Court’s size is likely to remain a flashpoint in the coming election cycles, especially as Democratic leaders like Clyburn and Harris lend their voices to the cause.
When politicians propose rewriting the rules whenever they lose, it’s the public, and the rule of law, that gets left behind.
