Rep. Mike Levin Votes No on GOP Amendment to Surrender Congress’s Constitutional Authority over Supreme Court
Washington, D.C.—Today, Rep. Mike Levin (CA-49) voted against H.J.Res.1, a proposed constitutional amendment that would enshrine the U.S. Supreme Court at nine Justices in the Constitution and strip future Congresses of its existing authority to determine the size of the Court. Rep. Levin opposed the amendment because he believes Congress should be defending its constitutional powers and responsibilities rather than voluntarily surrendering them. Rep. Levin released the following statement after his vote:
“Congress should be protecting the powers entrusted to it by the Constitution, not voting to surrender them. The Constitution leaves the size of the Supreme Court to Congress, and Article I entrusts Congress with the legislative authority to carry out that responsibility. This constitutional amendment asks us to surrender that power, which is precisely why I voted against it.
“There is an important distinction between choosing not to exercise a power and amending the Constitution to ensure that Congress can never exercise that power again. That distinction matters even more at a time when Washington Republicans are set on surrendering congressional authority left and right to the Trump Administration. Time and time again, my Republican colleagues have failed to defend Congress’s role as a coequal branch of government and have stood by as this Administration has stripped Congress’s power of the purse, resisted congressional oversight, and sought to expand presidential authority at every possible opportunity. To voluntarily strip Congress of yet another constitutional power is the wrong response at the worst possible time.
“I am a firm believer that the Supreme Court needs very serious reform to make it more accountable to the American people and to restore public confidence. I have been a vocal advocate for codifying 18-year term limits for Supreme Court Justices, and I strongly support implementing rigorous and enforceable ethics and conduct requirements that hold the Justices to meaningful standards of accountability. Congress should pursue those reforms and utilize the powers vested to us by Article I of the Constitution before we consider changing the size of the Court.
“The Framers created three coequal branches of government precisely to avoid the dangers of concentrated power. My vote today does not reflect a position on changing the composition and structure of the Supreme Court. Rather, it is a vote against writing another surrender of congressional power into the Constitution and tying the hands of future Congresses in the process.”
###