Supreme Court "court packing" is only considered as such because it violates "norms". It doesn't violate the Constitution. The refusal to consider Merrick Garland and the timing on the ACB appointment violate norms. If only one party is held to norms, the norms are no longer norms.
Just saying: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/10/12/where-court-packing-is-already-happening-428601
Supreme Court "court packing" is only considered as such because it violates "norms". It doesn't violate the Constitution. The refusal to consider Merrick Garland and the timing on the ACB appointment violate norms. If only one party is held to norms, the norms are no longer norms.