With a dangerous court-packing movement pushed by Democratic progressives, the commission held a Zoom meeting on Wednesday.
The 36-member commission went virtual in its first meeting – a strange tactic when the entire constitutional order is hanging in the balance. The commission’s idea of encouraging “commentary and debate” on this politicization of the federal judiciary is to filter everything through unnamed, faceless bureaucrats.
Attendance at the virtual event required registration by submitting name, 组织 (if applicable), email address and phone number to the Designated Federal Officer who, 当然, was unknown to any of us.
- 杰森·查菲兹（Jason Chaffetz）: Biden’s COVID relief – here’s how you can track the waste, fraud and abuse, in US and abroad
- 它的. 里克·斯科特: New Cold War – China threat is clear. Here’s how US, allies must respond to defend freedom
- Dan Gainor |: Cuomos and CNN – how low can network’s credibility go amid brothers’ 丑闻?
What was billed as a serious project giving thoughtful attention to a mounting problem quickly revealed itself as a political show. Wednesday’s meeting – the first of only six public meetings – lasted just over 20 minutes. Only a handful of the commissioners spoke and, when they did, they read from a script.
We were assured that the public will have input, but only if they send an email or happen to qualify as one of the “取决于 24″ nameless witnesses to be called at the next two public meetings of the commission.
One of the bedrock principles of a democratic system of government is that a free, self-governed people, sovereign over their democracy, must have the information they need to make sound choices at the ballot box and hold their representatives accountable. How will elected officials know if voters favor court-packing or are against it?