176: FDR v. “The Nine Old Men” (The New Deal pt. 3): Court Packing and Closing the New Deal
Mar 24, 2025
auto_awesome
The podcast dives into FDR's contentious battle with the Supreme Court during his second term. It explores his audacious court-packing plan, aimed at increasing the number of justices to align them with his vision for the New Deal. The backlash from Congress and the public highlights the intense political drama of the era. Key events, like the West Coast Hotel Company v. Parrish case, illustrate the shifting landscape of judicial interpretation. The discussion also touches on Eleanor Roosevelt’s activism amidst the Great Depression's social challenges.
01:11:18
AI Summary
AI Chapters
Episode notes
auto_awesome
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
FDR's court-packing plan aimed to expand the Supreme Court from nine to fifteen justices to secure New Deal support but faced significant opposition.
The proposal highlighted the delicate balance between necessary judicial reform and fears of executive overreach, raising constitutional and democratic concerns.
Despite the plan's failure in Congress, it initiated a shift in the Supreme Court's rulings towards FDR's New Deal policies due to public pressure.
Deep dives
FDR's Ambitious Plans and the New Deal's Challenges
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt is determined to push through major reforms for the Supreme Court amidst a challenging political landscape. He sees the current Justices, often referred to as the 'nine old men,' as obstructionists to his New Deal policies, having struck down numerous initiatives designed to aid recovery during the Great Depression. FDR's plan involves expanding the number of Justices from nine to fifteen, which he justifies as a necessary response to the Court's heavy workload and aging justices. However, critics argue that this move is an attempt to pack the Court to secure favorable rulings for his New Deal programs, raising significant constitutional and democratic concerns.
Historical Context and Constitutional Authority
A deep dive into the historical evolution of the Supreme Court reveals that its structure and authority have changed throughout history, dictated largely by congressional acts rather than strict constitutional guidelines. The Constitution grants Congress the power to determine the number of Justices, making FDR's proposal not unconstitutional, but rather a challenge to longstanding tradition and precedent. Past instances of altering the composition of the Supreme Court illustrate the contentious relationship between the judicial and executive branches, especially when it comes to checks and balances. FDR's struggles highlight the tension between the need for judicial reform and the fear of executive overreach in a democratic society.
Public and Political Backlash Against the Court-Packing Plan
The unveiling of FDR's court-packing plan triggers a swift and scathing backlash from the public and political leaders alike. Prominent newspapers express their disapproval, characterizing the plan as a dangerous power grab that undermines democratic principles. Members of Congress, including some from FDR's own party, openly oppose the measure, fearing damage to the integrity of the judicial branch. As public sentiment turns, FDR faces increasing resistance, which puts pressure on his administration and complicates his New Deal agenda.
Fireside Chats and Attempts to Shift Public Opinion
In his famous fireside chats, FDR seeks to communicate directly with the American people, explaining his rationale for the proposed changes to the Supreme Court. He frames the discussion around the necessity of an adaptable and responsive judiciary that reflects modern conditions, emphasizing the importance of governmental flexibility in times of crisis. Despite his efforts, the public remains skeptical, and his messaging struggles to resonate effectively with various demographics. As the Court continues to rule against New Deal initiatives, FDR's popularity begins to wane, creating further political challenges.
The Aftermath of the Court-Packing Debacle
Ultimately, FDR's court-packing bill faces a resounding defeat in Congress, marking one of the significant political losses of his presidency. While the plan fails, the tension created surrounding the issue leads to a subtle shift in the Supreme Court's approach, with some Justices beginning to rule in favor of New Deal programs following the backlash. FDR claims a kind of victory, asserting that public pressure and the attempt at reform successfully prompted a change in judicial behavior. However, the events reveal the fragility of FDR's political capital and the complexities of executive power amid a divided government.
“No matter how great and good a man may be, executive aggrandizement is not safe for democracy.”
This is the story of Franklin’s second term and his battle with the Supreme Court.
It’s no secret that SCOTUS hasn’t really been ruling in the New Deal’s favor. But with such an overwhelming victory at the polls, Franklin feels confident that he can circumvent that by upping the number of judges from nine to fifteen and appointing people who see the vision. But what does the public make of it? What does Congress think? Is this court-packing plan a timely reform? Or is it a blatant disregard for the constitutional concept of checks and balances?
It’s incredibly polarizing, so much so that members of Congress are willing to argue, filibuster, and even die over the bill. Literally.
