This is a bit disingenuous however, since 24 states also have elected judges, and every state other than Rhode Island has term-limited judges: state courts are a different beast. https://twitter.com/paulgp/status/1321873362453450752">https://twitter.com/paulgp/st...
Increasing the size of the bench in a context where the people being added are 1) going to be chosen via election or 2) going to be replaceable anyways after 6 years by the next governor is not even remotely similar to adding more life-term judges.
Thus, in terms of the extent to which court packing is a novel, extreme, or escalatory tactic, at the state court level it really doesn& #39;t seem like it would be.

Cool, cool, you packed the court: the next governor gets to replace the people you added.
Expanding or reducing the size of a state court may or may not be good. It may or may not be corrupt. And it probably does tell us something about SCOTUS.... but.... what is that something? That& #39;s not a simple question!
I mean, would it be court-packing if terms were extended in a state which currently has a conservative court?

Because KY had a ballot measure to do exactly that this year.
Is that court packing?

I don& #39;t think it is, because it& #39;s not nearly the level of institutional escalation. And indeed the fact that 20 states have tried it in 10 years strongly suggests these things are *not* similar!
Across 230 years of existence, the court& #39;s size has changed 6 times. I know of two or three cases where there was an attempt to change the size and it failed; call it 10 cases over 230 years.
Oh man I& #39;m about to shoot myself in the face here but what has begun cannot be stopped
So, that& #39;s an annual hazard of court packing of about 4.3%: 10/230.

What& #39;s the annual hazard of state court packing in the 10-year window sampled for this paper?
You can follow @lymanstoneky.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: