Biden Panel Disagrees On Adding More Justices

The New York Times: Debate Over ‘Packing’ Supreme Court Divides Biden Panel 
The bipartisan commission appointed by President Biden to study possible changes to the federal judiciary unanimously approved a final report on Tuesday that flagged “profound disagreement” among its members over the issue that led to the panel’s creation: calls to expand or “pack” the Supreme Court with additional justices. By a vote of 34 to 0, the commission approved a 288-page report that offered a critical appraisal of arguments for and against that and many other ideas for changes to the Supreme Court, including imposing 18-year term limits on justices and reducing their power to strike down acts of Congress. (Savage, 12/7)

USA Today: Biden Supreme Court Commission Finishes Work; Has No View On 'Packing'
The nearly 300-page document noted "profound disagreement" over expanding the size of the nine-member court and it does not make a recommendation about the idea, an outcome that will give Biden political cover to sidestep progressive Democrats who hoped adding members would limit the power of the court's 6-3 conservative majority. Biden's commission finished its work as the Supreme Court is considering several high-profile cases that have captured the nation's attention, including a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that established a constitutional right to abortion. A series of polls, meanwhile, have indicated slipping support for the high court. (Fritze, 12/7)

AP: Biden's Supreme Court Commission Releases Final Report
The makeup of the Supreme Court has come into even sharper focus following a ban on abortions after six weeks in Texas and arguments last week on a Mississippi case in which the 6-3 conservative-leaning court signaled a willingness either to overturn or substantially roll back abortion rights enshrined in the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision and its 1992 ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed Roe. A decision isn’t expected for months. The commission’s review was a campaign promise Biden made in response to pressure from activists and Democrats after the court’s composition tilted sharply to the right during former President Donald Trump’s term. He’s largely avoided the topic since. (Long, 12/8)

In related news about Roe v. Wade —

Politico: Most Voters Back Abortion Rights But Are Not Swayed By Threat To Roe, Poll Finds
Far more voters say they want the Supreme Court to leave Roe v. Wade in place than not, but the issue isn't a key motivator heading into the midterm elections, according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll. Justices by next June are expected to decide whether to scrap the half-century-old decision underpinning abortion rights and let states chose if they want to ban the procedure early in pregnancy. Already, activists on both sides of the issue are framing the stakes for voters and pouring millions of dollars into ads, voter mobilization efforts and direct campaign donations. (Ollstein, 12/7)

AP: If Roe Falls, Some Fear Ripple Effect On Civil Rights Cases
If the Supreme Court decides to overturn or gut the decision that legalized abortion, some fear that it could undermine other precedent-setting cases, including civil rights and LGBTQ protections. Overturning Roe v. Wade would have a bigger effect than most cases because it was reaffirmed by a second decision, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, three decades later, legal scholars and advocates said. The Supreme Court’s conservative majority signaled in arguments last week they would allow states to ban abortion much earlier in pregnancy and may even overturn the nationwide right that has existed for nearly 50 years. A decision is expected next summer. (Whitehurst, 12/8)

In other Supreme Court action —

Modern Healthcare: Supreme Court Won't Revive Antitrust Lawsuit Against Atrium Health
The Supreme Court on Monday declined to review a lower court's decision that Atrium Health is immune to antitrust lawsuits due to its status as a "local government unit. The justices declined a petition to revive a proposed class action lawsuit alleging that Atrium uses its dominant market position to stop insurers from guiding patients toward less expensive healthcare options. (Devereaux, 12/7)

Also —

Politico: Meadows: Trump Considered Yanking Kavanaugh Over ‘I Like Beer’ Comments And Apologetic Tone
During Brett Kavanaugh’s controversial 2018 Supreme Court confirmation hearings, President Donald Trump “strongly considered” dropping the nominee and instead going with a “stronger candidate,” according to a new book by Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows. It wasn’t because of accusations that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted Christine Blasey Ford while in high school, but because he’d professed that he “liked beer” during his hearings and was, in Trump’s estimation, being too apologetic. (McGraw, 12/7)