And "packing the court" nonsense by Trajan? I wish he would read more carefully and use words correctly.
While the court has three vacancies, they are not among the 32 “judicial emergencies” identified by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts—and the president hasn’t even made nominations to most of those seats. Moreover, the court’s caseload is among the lowest of the courts of appeals, at 88 cases per judge, and declining. According to one current judge, “If any more judges were added now, there wouldn’t be enough work to go around.” Is Obama trying to pack the DC appeals court? | TheHill
There are three legitimate openings, gang. The AOOTUSC states that filling them are not "judicial emergencies" and that "there wouldn't be enough work to go around."
The above put's the statement "packing the courts" into nuance and context. It is not an FDR attempt to increase the normal size of the court. However, yes, it is apparently an attempt by the administration to protect is core legislation.
Now can we debate this logically and not so emotionally.
right so, you object to my use of 'pack', oh ok,
how about adding 3 judges to a court that doesn't need them as stipulated, I already said they were not overloaded and their cases have fallen in fact ( see below).
so, in essence he and reid chose to fight a battle over "judicial nominations" based on what again? Nothing, yet there are judicial emergencies out there that required his expending the concomitant energy, capital and will to get nominated and into seats. If they got these 3 they would have gone home happy, this was the plan.
Its not like this is some coincidence either, the DC court has been from a judicial standpoint an Obama bane......they reviewed and found several obama regs and actions questionable and in a pretty stern rebuke called him out and found illegal his appointment of NLR seats while the Senate was in recess....
Add to that reversals and challenges on Financial reforms, environmental protection, or nearer and dearer, the latest, striking down his contraception mandate.
You want to split hairs on my use of 'pack'? well, what would you cal it? This was all a Trojan Horse, many of you, like you jake like to take the gop to task for waging ideological warfare and demanding litmus tests for nominees ( thats a democratic invention btw) etc etc ......well??
qed-
So is the Republican use of the filibuster today simply fair turn-around — with Democrats in no position to complain when Republicans use tactics they themselves introduced?
If so, that would be enough to illustrate the hypocrisy of today’s Democratic protests. But that’s not what’s at issue here. In the D.C. Circuit matter, which has driven Senator Reid to the nuclear option, Republicans are not raising ideological objections to Obama’s nominees — as Democrats did when they filibustered Bush’s picks.
Their objection, rather, is that these judges are not needed, because the workload of the court is so light. In fact, speaking of hypocrisy, Democrats, in the minority in the 109th Congress, used that very rationale to urge Judiciary Committee chairman Arlen Specter in a July 2006 letter not to confirm any additional Bush nominees to the D.C. Circuit — and none was confirmed after that letter from Senators Leahy, Feinstein, Schumer, and Durbin was sent, all of whom are still on the committee. Yet now, when the court’s workload is even lighter, Democrats cry foul when Republicans point that out.
more at-
Filibuster Reaction: Harry Reid?s nuclear hypocrisy
but that doesn't surprise me. 
