AnĀ Indiana Senate committee Wednesday approved a proposal calling for a rare constitutional convention to keep the number of Supreme Court justices at nine.
The proposal,Ā Senate Joint Resolution 3, authored by Sen. Jim Buck (above), R-Kokomo, drew skepticism from members of both parties.
āSen. Buck, it seems like, what do they call that movie, āGroundhog Dayā? ā¦ It seems like Iāve seen this before,ā Taylor said.
Taylor and others recalled when previous President Pro Tem Sen. David Long pushed for a constitutional convention.
Buck says he got much of his inspiration for SJR 3 from recordings of former Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburgāa famously liberal member of the court. He quoted Ginsburg as saying, āIf [the number of court justices] changed higher, youāre running the risk of viewing the court as being politicized.ā
Taylor rebutted, saying the resolution itself was political.
āWell, I wish you would quote her more, but hereās the question: I donāt know if you know this, but talking about politicizing the court, [former Supreme Court nominee] Merrick Garland was actually pushed to, or actually chosen by, the president [Barack Obama] to take the seat of Antonin Scalia,ā he said.
āAnd the Republican Party, who controlled the Senate, had that vacancy open for 422 days. Then, when they became the majority in the Senate, and Ruth Bader Ginsburgās seat, just quoted, came open, Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed within 37 days. Wasnāt that political?ā
Lanane also shared his concerns with the resolution.
āIām not going to support the resolution, Senator, and itās not your particular resolution. Our former Pro Tem, Sen. Long, always wanted to have one of these Article 5 conventions, too. And the problem that I see with that is, how do you stop it from becoming what they call the ārunaway convention?ā
TheĀ runaway conventionĀ is the fear that if a constitutional convention were to be held, constitutional amendment proposals would become uncontrollable, allowing for government chaos.
āSen. Buck, I appreciate your efforts, and I must say that I agree with you. Iād like to see the court remain at nine, simply because I think itās less political. You can never say that any body politic is not political in this day and age. But I think itās less political. It is more congenial with a smaller number,ā she said.
āBut for the same reason, I opposed Sen. Long each and every time he brought forth his resolutions for an Article 5 convention. I donāt believe in a runaway situation,ā Glick continued.
āAnd I believe the political atmosphere in Washington, D.C., and throughout the United States right now would make this the most dangerous thing that could happen, next to the insurrection that tried to take over the capitol of the United States on Jan. 6 of last year. For that reason, I will be opposing the resolution.ā
Sen. Aaron Freeman, R-Indianapolis, disagreed with these committee members, stating that the resolution was not political.
āI just disagree with my friends, and Sen. Taylor and I are friends. And I consider that, I just disagree. I donāt think thereās anything about Sen. Buckās resolution that is political,ā he said.
Except for Glick, Republicans on the committee agreed to the resolution, which passed with a vote of 7-4.
Ashlyn Myers and Bessie Kerr are reporters forĀ TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.
