President Donald Trump responded to comments by former Attorney General Eric Holder, saying that Democrats are pursuing a Supreme Court expansion plan that could severely harm the Constitution.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump reacted to a recent appearance by Eric Holder in which he floated the possibility of expanding the Supreme Court if Democrats take full control of government in 2028. Trump described Holder as an “Obama sycophant” who “did so much to hurt our Country,” calling him the “former Attorney General of the United States” who “weaponized the Obama Administration against the Republican Party (and ME!).”
Referring to Holder by the nickname “FAST AND FURIOUS,” invoking the Obama-era gun-running scandal, Trump warned that Holder “emphatically stated, above all else, that Democrats will PACK the Supreme Court of the United States if they get the chance.” According to Trump, Holder supports not just a minor expansion, but an increase to “21 Radical Left Activist Judges,” up from “the heretofore 15 that they were seeking.”
Trump asserted that such a move “will destroy our Constitution,” adding that there is “not a thing that the Republicans can do about it unless we TERMINATE THE FILIBUSTER.” He tied the potential elimination of the filibuster to electoral success for Republicans, predicting it would lead to an “easy WIN of the Midterms, and an even easier WIN in the Presidential Election of 2028.” Trump urged Republicans to act, writing, “The American People don’t want gridlock, they want their Leaders to GET THINGS DONE — TERMINATE THE FILIBUSTER, AND HAVE THE MOST SUCCESSFUL FOUR YEARS IN THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY, BY FAR, WITH NOT EVEN THE HINT OF A SHUTDOWN OF OUR GREAT NATION ON JANUARY 30TH!”
The video Trump referenced features Holder declaring the Supreme Court “a broken institution,” maintaining it “cannot be left in place without a discussion, at least.” He continues: “Without substantive reforms being put in place, this Supreme Court, as it is presently constituted — if there is a Democratic trifecta in 2028 — Supreme Court reform is something that has to be considered. Potentially expanding the Court is something, I think, that also should be considered.”
This is not the first time Holder has raised the idea of altering the composition of the Court. In a January 2021 event hosted by the Brookings Institution, he argued for court-packing in light of what he called a “crisis of legitimacy” created by the appointment of a conservative majority. He blamed the current makeup of the judiciary on Republicans’ refusal to confirm Merrick Garland to the Court in 2016, followed by the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett in 2020. Holder said Democrats “must use the power that they now have,” and stated: “I believe it would be totally appropriate to add additional seats to the Supreme Court, in response to what has transpired over the past few years.”
At that same event, Holder claimed the courts had become “political bodies,” and that federal courts were filled with “ideologues who consistently reach rulings based on their stunted mindsets.” He also endorsed 18-year term limits for justices and a minimum qualifying age of 50 years, advocating for greater diversity on the bench.
Holder made similar arguments in both 2020 and 2021, citing Republican refusal to confirm Merrick Garland and the swift confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett as reasons Democrats should consider court reform, including adding justices. In a 2020 appearance, he asserted that if Republicans succeeded in replacing Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, it would result in “a 6-3 court” with a conservative majority ruling on critical issues “for generations to come.”
In January 2024, former Attorney General Eric Holder commented on MSNBC’s The ReidOut that the Supreme Court’s “legitimacy is at stake” in its handling of former President Donald Trump’s eligibility case. Referring to Trump’s legal team’s arguments, Holder remarked: “There is again no constitutional basis for it, no historical precedent for it.” He added that ruling in Trump’s favor would “really put at risk how the court will be viewed by the American public” and cautioned it would also endanger democracy and the rule of law.
