The unfortunate death of Justice Scalia has brought election year turmoil to the process of selecting a replacement. Democrats demand prompt action while Republicans advocate for “wait until next year” even though they know they may not win. The Constitution doesn’t specify a number of justices for the Court, which began with 6 and has had as many as 10, so this really isn’t a constitutional argument; it’s a political one. The Supreme Court, with it’s authority to review laws for constitutionality, was supposed to serve as a somewhat independent check on overreaches of power by either the executive or legislative branches. Instead it has become a pawn of partisan conflict.
When a president appoints a justice solely to advance a party agenda, overturn previous rulings, or “legislate from the bench” the court becomes an arm of the executive branch with influence much longer than the president’s term of office. That isn’t what the authors of the Constitution intended. In it’s pursuit of collectivism the far left sees the Court as a means to nullify the individual rights granted by Bill of Rights. The Court has no authority to amend the Constitution or repeal its amendments. Justice Scalia understood that. There’s a procedure for amending the Constitution that requires more than a court decision.
Freedom: it’s easy to lose and almost impossible to get back.