REMINDER: RBG Opposed Packing Supreme Court, But Will Dems Honor Her Wishes?

(FiveNation.com)- In response to the very real possibility that President Donald Trump will nominate a new Supreme Court Justice to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Democrats have said that every option – including packing the court – should be on the table to deal with a conservative majority in the highest court of the land.

Justice Ginsburg, however, already dismissed the idea of packing the court with new judges as a bad idea.

During an interview with Nina Totenburg, Ginsburg described her position on the number of judges that should be on the supreme court.

“There is no fixed number in the Constitution, so this court has had as few as five and as many as 10,” she said.

“Nine seems to be a good number and it’s been that way for a long time,” Ginsburg added.

She didn’t stop there, either. Ginsburg specifically targeted Democrats who advocated packing the courts, saying she thought it was a bad idea.

“I have heard that there are some people on the Democratic side who would like to increase the number of judges,” she said. “I think that was a bad idea when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt tried to pack the court, his plan was for every justice who stays on the court past the age of 70, the president would have the authority to nominate another justice. If that plan had been effective, the court’s number would have swelled immediately from nine to 15 and the president would have six appointments to make.”

Despite Ginsburg’s warnings, Democrats are committed to doing anything they can to stop the court leaning towards constitutional conservatism. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have all said that nothing is off the table in their efforts to stop the president nominating a new Supreme Court Justice, or taking steps to minimize the influence the new judge would have.

With this unearthed footage, will the Democrats listen to Ruth Bader Ginsburg or go ahead with their radical agenda anyway?