Former Vice President Kamala Harris called for expanding the Supreme Court and changing the Electoral College during an interview with Keke Palmer, arguing that Democrats should pursue structural reforms if they regain control of Congress.
“I believe that we need to expand the Supreme Court,” Harris said on the Baby, This is Keke Palmer podcast. “We need more justices on the Supreme Court so that we can have a court that actually reinforces the spirit and principles behind the Constitution of the United States.”
Calls to expand the court, as well as term limits for justices, have come primarily from some Democrats, particularly after Republicans confirmed three justices during President Donald Trump's first term—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—giving conservatives a 6-3 majority that has since issued major rulings on abortion, voting rights, presidential power and other issues.
Trump recently used this issue as a warning to Republicans, arguing that the GOP should act first or risk losing future elections. "The Dumocrats are openly stating that they plan to...EXPAND THE SUPREME COURT," he wrote in a Truth Social post in July, four months before the midterms, linking to a Politico article, which details a resolution from the Black, Hispanic and progressive caucus chairs that includes “enacting structural changes” to the court as well as other reforms.
In the podcast episode released on Tuesday, Harris also said the popular vote “has to matter” and backed pushing for statehood for Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico if their residents want it.
Harris did not outline a specific plan for changing the presidential election system. Her remarks raised two distinct possibilities: replacing the Electoral College with a nationwide popular vote, and granting statehood to D.C. and Puerto Rico. Statehood would change their representation and electoral votes; by itself, it would not make the national popular vote determine the presidency.
Newsweek has reached out to the Office of Kamala Harris outside of regular office hours for comment.
...
What Expanding the Supreme Court Could Change
The Constitution does not fix the Court’s size, so expansion could be done through legislation.
Congress has changed the court's size several times throughout U.S. history, though the Supreme Court has had nine justices since 1869.
Any newly created seats would be filled by presidential nomination and Senate confirmation.
This means the political effect would depend on who controls the White House and Senate when seats are created and filled. More justices could shift the Court’s balance under a Democratic president, or a Republican one, and a future administration could seek to expand the Court again.
A September Marquette Law School poll found that 53 percent of adults favored increasing the number of justices, while 47 percent opposed it. Support was sharply divided by party: 68 percent of Democrats favored expansion, compared with 35 percent of Republicans; 56 percent of independents were in favor.
Popular Vote Has Majority Support but a Partisan Divide
Under the current system, states appoint electors, and most award all their electoral votes to the statewide winner. That allows a presidential candidate to win the Electoral College without winning the most votes nationwide. A direct popular vote would make the national vote total decisive.
A 2024 Pew Research Center survey found that 63 percent of Americans preferred changing the system so the candidate with the most votes nationally wins, while 35 percent favored keeping the Electoral College. Eight in 10 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents supported replacing it; Republicans were more divided, with 53 percent favoring the current system and 46 percent preferring a popular vote.
The proposal is often viewed as more favorable to Democrats, who won the national popular vote in seven of the eight presidential elections from 1992 through 2020. But that is no guarantee of future outcomes: Donald Trump won both the popular vote and Electoral College in 2024.
A constitutional amendment replacing the Electoral College would need two-thirds support in both chambers of Congress and ratification by three-quarters of the states. Another approach, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, would direct participating states’ electors to the national popular-vote winner once states totaling at least 270 electoral votes have joined.
...
Harris Has Not Decided on a 2028 Run
Asked directly by Palmer whether she would run for president again, Harris replied: “I haven’t decided. I haven’t decided yet. I will, I promise.” She said her focus was on the 2026 midterms, adding: “’28 don’t matter if we don’t do ’26 right.”
Harris is leading early Democratic primary polling. The latest RealClearPolling's average, through October 6, put her at 26.4 percent, ahead of California Governor Gavin Newsom at 14.4 percent. A Financial Times/Focaldata poll conducted October 3–6 had Harris at 30 percent and Newsom at 15 percent.
Prediction markets tell a different story. Polymarket figures as of early Friday morning put Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from New York at 17 percent, Newsom at 15 percent, Senator Jon Ossoff from Georgia at 14 percent and Harris at 7 percent to win the Democratic nomination. Those market prices are not polling, and no major Democratic candidate has declared a campaign.