Rewritten Article: MSNBC’s Left-Wing Panel Criticizes Biden for Not Pursuing Court Reform or Packing the Supreme Court
During a recent segment on MSNBC, a group of journalists raised their voices in dissent against President Joe Biden, calling him out for failing to pursue court reform and considering stacking the bench. The panelists’ discussion revolved around oral arguments presented by former president Donald Trump regarding his immunity claim as Special Counsel Jack Smith investigates election interference cases.
Alcia Menendez of MSNBC initiated the conversation, stating that 70% of Americans believe presidents should not enjoy absolute immunity from prosecution. She then questioned what recourse is left for those who share this view in light of recent court proceedings. “There’s court reform, there’s stacking the Court? What do you see as the path forward because clearly something more structural is necessary,” Menendez said.
Ankush Khardori, a writer at Politico Magazine and MSNBC guest, concurred with Menendez’ stance that failing to explore court reform could go down in history as Biden’s “historic political miscalculation.” The comment came despite Biden reportedly expressing his opposition towards packing the Supreme Court during his transition period.
MSNBC host Symone Sanders Townsend, who previously worked with Biden, argued that he was against court-packing because of his belief in following rules and systems. “He himself does not believe that [court-packing] is an avenue that should be explored,” she explained before acknowledging the opposing viewpoint held by Khardori.
Khardori maintained that Biden’s stance was misguided, stating: “I hate to say this about the president; he’s been wrong about [court-packing] from the beginning.” He went on to highlight how recent Supreme Court decisions have challenged constitutional principles and called for a more structural approach.
As they debated whether court reform or packing should be explored, panelists noted that Biden’s reluctance could potentially result in “some new crazy doctrine” emerging as part of an upcoming ruling regarding presidential immunity by late June 2024. Trump’s legal team has argued against prosecuting presidents while in office due to the potential for increased and frequent politically motivated accusations leading into a spiral cycle that will eventually undermine any individual leader’s work for themselves as well other incoming commanders-in chief at every turn of future cases arising from their actions.
Leave a Reply