Urging Congress to propose and submit to the states for ratification the "Keep Nine" amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
If enacted, the resolution would express a formal stance from the Texas Legislature advocating for the preservation of the Supreme Court's composition. It reflects a growing concern among some lawmakers and constituents regarding potential changes that might undermine judicial independence. The passage of SCR9 would not directly alter state laws but signals to Texas lawmakers, the national legislative body, and the citizenry the importance of maintaining a stable and independent judiciary.
SCR9, a Senate Concurrent Resolution, aims to urge Congress to propose and submit for ratification the 'Keep Nine' amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This proposed amendment seeks to ensure that the Supreme Court of the United States maintains a consistent composition of nine justices, which proponents argue is crucial for upholding the independence of the judiciary. The resolution emphasizes that over the history of the U.S. Supreme Court, it has traditionally comprised nine justices, thus advocating against any attempts by the president or Congress to alter this number.
The sentiment surrounding SCR9 appears supportive among its proponents, who view it as a necessary safeguard against potential political motives that could influence the composition of the Supreme Court. The resolution garnered significant support in the legislature, passing the Senate with a vote of 27 to 3 and the House with 87 to 46, indicating a level of bipartisan consensus on the need to maintain judicial independence. Critics of any potential changes to judicial composition may see this resolution as a valid and necessary position.
There are notable points of contention amongst legal scholars and lawmakers regarding the Supreme Court's composition and its implications for checks and balances within the government. While SCR9 is largely viewed as a protective measure for maintaining judicial integrity, there are debates about the necessity of such measures, particularly among those who argue that judicial reform may be needed in the wake of perceived partisanship within the court. The resolution encapsulates a broader dialogue concerning the balance of power within the federal government's three branches.