There is no procedure in place to not put seats on the Court or take them away, for that matter. That is where you fail. Miserably.If the Barrett nomination/ratification was not an abuse of power then neither is increasing the court. You can't have it both ways.How was it an abuse of power? Was a seat not vacant? Would any other president not have done the exact same thing? Would you also say that any of those other presidents would be guilty of an abuse of power?That's your opinion, but I disagree. It was an abuse of power.
Like I said, if you want to complain about garland, I get that, but trumps appointments cannot be considered a power grab because seats were vacant.
What congress is proposing now, to expand scotus, THATS a power grab.
Yes, you actually CAN have it both ways, when one way is simply following the procedure in place, and the other way is radically changing the system.
I get that you somehow think the operating formula here is, "Which party gets to appoint more Justices?" but it's actually not.
So by all means, keep whining to us about how appointing a Justice to an open seat is exactly the same as restructuring the court. It certainly doesn't matter to us if you make a laughable partisan fool out of yourself if it doesn't matter to you.