U.S. House Republicans on Thursday denounced expanding the Supreme Court, an idea some Democrats support to dilute the court’s conservative majority after years of decisions that have angered liberals.

Republican and Democratic lawmakers at a hearing clashed over the future of the high court following Louisiana v. Callais, a landmark decision gutting the federal Voting Rights Act. 

The ruling cleared the way for GOP-controlled Southern states to eliminate congressional districts held by Black Democrats ahead of the November midterm elections.

Democrats have responded by renewing calls for changing the Supreme Court, including expanding the number of justices beyond the nine currently serving. Thursday’s hearing offered a preview of how Republicans may attack those plans if Democrats retake the House in November and try to advance a court overhaul through the chamber.

“Will the United States Congress side with the idea that we should be more democratic in our third branch, or that our third branch should remain more independent, less if not completely outside” the will of the people at the moment, said Rep. Darrell Issa, a California Republican who chairs the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, and the Internet.

‘Court packing’

The subcommittee hearing, officially titled “Court Packing: A Threat to the Supreme Court’s Legitimacy,” centered on Republican warnings that adding justices would create a slippery slope with no clear end. Democrats countered that the court is placing democracy at risk.

It’s not clear a bill to expand the court would pass a Democratic-controlled House. No clear consensus exists among Democrats over exactly what changes should be made, and other ideas include term limits for justices, a mandatory ethics code for the court or limiting the kind of cases the court can take. 

Any overhaul would face a steep path to becoming law in the near term because of the Senate filibuster and President Donald Trump’s veto.

But Democrats are broadly furious with the Supreme Court and support is growing for some form of action. 

Former Vice President Kamala Harris last week called for a discussion of Supreme Court reform, including expanding the court. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a New York Democrat set to become speaker if his party retakes the chamber, has said “something” must be done in the next Congress.

“Our nation is now in Jim Crow 2.0,” Rep. Henry “Hank” Johnson, a Georgia Democrat and the subcommittee’s ranking member, said at the hearing.

Ruling that sparked outrage

In Callais, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Louisiana had enacted an unconstitutional racial gerrymander when it drew a second majority-Black congressional district. 

The opinion sharply limits the use of race in redistricting, allowing states for partisan gain to split apart districts where most residents belong to a racial minority group. The Voting Rights Act had previously protected these districts.

Democrats have been outraged by other major decisions as well. 

The Citizens United case in 2010 dramatically expanded the role of corporate money in politics. Dobbs in 2022 ended the federal right to abortion. And in 2024, Trump v. United States gave the president sweeping immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office.

“We can either sit back as our Supreme Court continues to act without any restraint or checks and balances, or we can do something about it,” Johnson said.

Republicans say they’ve also lost

Republicans and witnesses called by GOP lawmakers emphasized that the Supreme Court has also ruled against conservatives in a number of high-profile cases. 

For example, Chief Justice John Roberts cast the decisive vote to uphold the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law. The Supreme Court also guaranteed the right to same-sex marriage in 2015 and bolstered employment protections for gay and transgender workers in 2019. 

More recently, the Supreme Court effectively blocked Trump’s deployments of the National Guard into Democratic cities. And in February, the justices struck down Trump’s global tariffs — his signature trade policy.

“We had a terrible tariff decision. They cost our country a fortune,” Trump said Thursday.

Gene Schaerr, a lawyer who has argued in front of the Supreme Court, suggested that if Democrats add justices, Republicans will almost certainly respond.

“Before long the only venue in Washington, D.C., that will be large enough to accommodate the Supreme Court’s conferences, their private conferences, will be the White House ballroom,” Schaerr told the subcommittee.

Merrick Garland nomination

But Republicans have already engaged in court packing, said Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat and the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee. 

When Justice Antonin Scalia died in February 2016, Senate Republicans led by then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky blocked consideration of Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland. After Trump won the 2016 election, the Senate moved swiftly to confirm his nominee, Neil Gorsuch, in early 2017.

Senate Republicans then quickly confirmed Trump nominee Amy Coney Barrett after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in September 2020 — despite the vacancy occurring much closer to the election than in 2016. Those decisions helped move a 5-4 court at the end of the Obama era to a 6-3 conservative majority.

“So right there we have two seats officially stolen by Mitch McConnell and the Republican Senate,” Raskin said.

On Thursday, Republicans cast Democratic attacks on the Supreme Court’s legitimacy as dangerous. The court relies on respect, Missouri Solicitor General Louis Capozzi said, with the norm of an independent judiciary built over time.

“Today, we take it for granted that government officials will follow the Supreme Court’s orders,” said Capozzi, who previously clerked for Gorsuch. “But that could change if politicians interfere with the Supreme Court’s independence.”

President Donald Trump is again demanding Congress pass a sweeping set of voting restrictions and refuses to rule out sending troops to the polls, as Democrats and voting rights groups assemble a sprawling effort to guard against federal election interference.

The fight over election security is intensifying in Washington, D.C., as the White House and its allies seek to rewrite rules around voter registration and mail-in ballots ahead of the November midterm elections. The stakes of the contests are massive — control of Congress and the future of Trump’s legislative agenda.

Trump wants lawmakers to attach the SAVE America Act to unrelated housing and surveillance legislation after it stalled in the U.S. Senate. The SAVE bill would require individuals to show documents, such as a passport or birth certificate, proving their citizenship to register to vote. It would also mandate voters show photo ID to cast a ballot.

“Voter I.D., and Proof of Citizenship, must be approved, NOW,” Trump wrote Saturday on Truth Social, his social media platform. On Wednesday, he took to social media again to call for the firing of the Senate parliamentarian and suggested she’s an impediment to passage of the bill.

“We need THE SAVE AMERICA ACT passed, and NOW,” Trump wrote.

Democrats and voting rights advocates say the measure would cause chaos if passed this close to the election. They warn it would disenfranchise voters and create additional obstacles to voting for married women and others who have changed their names.

Vote possible soon

The Senate may hold another vote as early as this week on adding the SAVE America Act to a budget reconciliation bill. Senators rejected a prior effort to advance the legislation in a 48-50 vote in April, but  Sen. John Kennedy, a Louisiana Republican, has vowed to try again. 

The SAVE America Act is popular among Republicans in the U.S. House, which passed the bill in February. But a handful of Senate Republicans have joined Democrats in opposing the proposal, which doesn’t have enough support to overcome a filibuster.

“It is voter suppression with a suit and tie,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, said Tuesday in a speech at a progressive conference.

Some House Republicans have kept up pressure on the Senate to act. During a House Administration Subcommittee on Elections hearing Wednesday, Rep. Mary Miller, an Illinois Republican, called for the passage of the bill multiple times.

“American citizens deserve secure elections and to know that their votes are guaranteed,” Miller said.

Thune blames Democrats

Senators spent several weeks this spring debating the legislation before moving on to other business. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, on Monday said the chamber held a “robust debate” but indicated senators were unlikely to return to the legislation.

Speaking about the bill in the past tense, Thune cast the measure as a political cudgel that Republicans would use against Democrats in November.

“Democrats are on the record against all of it,” Thune said on the Senate floor. “And we’ll be sure the American people know that Democrats are blocking commonsense policies that have broad support from the American people.”

Democrats, fearing that Trump may try to assert unilateral control over elections regardless of whether the legislation advances, have begun outlining how they plan to combat any attempted election takeover. 

Schumer on Tuesday said Senate Democrats are launching an election protection task force. The group, which will include 11 senators and election experts, will be prepared to mount “lawsuit after lawsuit” throughout the election process.

“Let me be very clear: local officials run elections. Voters decide elections. Donald Trump does not,” Schumer said.

Troops at polling places

In describing their concerns, Schumer and others point to Trump’s refusal earlier this month to close the door on deploying troops to polling places. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also recently dismissed the possibility as a “gotcha hypothetical” without actually ruling it out. 

Federal law prohibits federal troops and agents at election sites in nearly all circumstances.

“I’d do anything necessary to make sure we have honest elections,” Trump told reporters when asked about sending troops of immigration agents to the polls.

Trump’s critics also emphasize his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss and his continuing portrayal of the contest as stolen. He has pardoned rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, disrupting Congress’ certification of the election. 

On Monday, the Justice Department announced the creation of a $1.776 billion fund to compensate Trump allies who say they were victims of past administrations.

“This is pure fraud and highway robbery,” Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat, said in a statement.

Executive orders

Preparations for possible interference in the midterms come amid a series of steps by the Trump administration over the past year aimed at giving the White House greater authority over elections — though the U.S. Constitution says they are administered by the states.

Trump signed an executive order last year that sought to mandate proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections, but the measure was blocked in court. He signed another order in March restricting the sending of ballots through the mail; a federal judge is expected to rule soon on a request to halt its enforcement.

Trump this week attacked Maryland officials over a mistake that caused voters to receive incorrect mail-in ballots for the state’s June primary. Maryland election officials have faulted a vendor for the error and are resending the ballots, but the president has called for a Justice Department investigation.

“You want to have proof of citizenship, you want to have voter ID, you want to have all these things. But to me, maybe the worst of all is the mail-in ballots,” Trump told reporters on Monday.

DOJ battles states

For months, the Department of Justice has demanded states turn over sensitive personal data on voters, such as driver’s license numbers, partial Social Security numbers and dates of birth. 

It has sued 30 states and the District of Columbia for the information, which it plans to run through a computer program called SAVE at the Department of Homeland Security to identify possible noncitizens.

Federal judges have so far ruled against the Justice Department. Several voting rights groups have also sued to block the DOJ effort, alleging the Trump administration wants to build an illegal national voter database.

Anthony Nel, a Texas resident and one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, said in a statement that his voter registration was canceled a month after SAVE wrongly identified him as a possible noncitizen.

“The DOJ should not be building a national database out of our most sensitive, personal information when it can’t even get this right,” Nel said.

WASHINGTON — Family and friends of Virginia Roberts Giuffre gathered in the nation’s capital Saturday to mark one year since her death, and to demand justice for victims of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

On a stage across from the Ellipse, with the White House in the background, family members, advocates and women connected to Giuffre through shared horrors of sexual abuse held a vigil for her. 

They remembered the woman they say changed the world by sharing her story of abuse by the disgraced multi-millionaire who victimized roughly 1,000 women and girls, according to the U.S. Justice Department.

“Sis, today is your day,” Giuffre’s brother, Sky Roberts, said. “Today is Virginia’s Day, a day I know you would want us to be about celebrating survivors around the world, for both those that have come forward and those that have not, to be about inspiring us to continue speaking out, acting and reclaiming what many of us feel like we’ve lost.”

Giuffre died by suicide in April 2025 in Australia, where she had been living for several years. Giuffre had emerged as one of the most prominent victims after she challenged Epstein co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell and former British royal Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, alleging she had been trafficked and sexually abused.

Butterfly decorations, flowers and an artist rendering of Giuffre among animals and nature adorned the stage for the event attended by roughly 250 people.

The ceremony comes after nearly a year of renewed focus on the 2019 federal investigation of the disgraced financier. Interest reemerged and dogged Congress and President Donald Trump following an FBI memo in July that announced authorities found no reason to release further information going forward.

Trump, who campaigned on releasing the so-called Epstein files, and whose supporters for years stoked conspiracies, repeatedly dismissed the files last year as a “hoax.”

Shortly after Trump began his second term, former Attorney General Pam Bondi touted having Epstein’s client list on her desk.

All but one member of Congress voted in November to release the government’s investigative materials that led to sex trafficking charges against Epstein, who surrounded himself with powerful and wealthy figures, including Trump. The president denies any knowledge of the former hedge fund manager’s wrongdoings.

Epstein died in a Manhattan jail in August 2019 awaiting trial.

U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., told the crowd Saturday, “There is a difference between misfortune and injustice.”

“If you were born into an abusive family, as so many of the Epstein survivors were, as you learn from Virginia’s remarkable book, that’s a misfortune,” Raskin said, referring to Giuffre’s posthumous memoir titled “Nobody’s Girl.”

The Maryland Democrat recounted well-documented evidence that the Justice Department had a 60-count indictment against Epstein ready in 2008, but that then-U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Alex Acosta negotiated a plea deal for lesser state charges.

“If the whole of the government and the political elite organizes to block the truth and to repress change, that’s not just a misfortune, that’s an injustice, and we’re gonna do something about it,” Raskin said to cheers.

Advocacy groups, including the Women’s Law Project, Ultraviolet, World Without Exploitation and the National Organization for Women, helped stage Saturday’s memorial.

Giuffre’s book publicist, Dini von Mueffling, said shortly before Giuffre’s death she and Giuffre “wept and cheered” when they learned her book would be published by Penguin Random House.

“I so wish she could have seen that her brilliant book debuted at number one on the New York Times bestseller list and stayed on the list for 23 weeks — and then watch as Andrew lost his title,” von Mueffling said.

Mountbatten-Windsor, whose name and likeness appears in the Epstein investigative material, settled outside of court with Giuffre in 2022.

Maxwell is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking, though she was relocated to a lesser security prison by the Trump administration in August.

The Department of Justice, mandated by law, released millions of files related to the Epstein investigation in late 2025 and early 2026, though advocates and some lawmakers contend many redactions violate the law, and that many files remain unreleased.