Letter: Even numbered justices on Supreme Court can be beneficial

An even number of high court justices is a historical precedent set in our country’s early history and may actually be more beneficial. Congress retains the authority to establish the number of Supreme Court justices and in 1789, Congress passed and President Washington signed the Judiciary Act that set the number of justices on the high court to six. One consequence of the six-person court was that it required at minimum two-thirds of the Court (4-2) to affirm a statute passed by Congress as unconstitutional. In contemporary times, the trajectory of the nation has often been established by the personal whim of a single justice in commonplace 5-4 rulings.

Many opine that the court would be incapacitated without a ninth justice. An even ruling simply signifies that the court would abstain from overturning a lower federal court verdict, allowing it to stand. Such even numbered courts appear to mitigate judicial activism with judicial restraint. Judicial review is intended to invalidate acts that breach, as Alexander Hamilton put it, the “ manifest tenor” or obvious meaning of the Constitution; aptly known today as the “ clear-violation standard.” An even number of justices in our era would appear more representative and compel at least a two-vote margin of 5-3 when adhering to the clear violation standard.

Tony Favero

Half Moon Bay