Sen. Marco Rubio, the off-again-on-again Republican from Florida who will always be angling for the White House, has a deep thought about "protecting" the sanctity of the Supreme Court. It basically comes down to letting in all the Republican judges, then pulling the ladder away.
In a Fox News op-ed, Rubio announces "I am proposing a constitutional amendment to prevent the next political and cultural flashpoint: the packing of the Supreme Court for partisan gains." That's to help overcome "corrosive tribalism" until we can achieve "a restoration of family and community." Whatever that means. It probably has something to do with the Bible verses he tweets all the time. Rubio pontificates that "we are suffering a crisis of confidence and we cannot withstand further erosion of trust in one another and our institutions." Expanding the court would be that "erosion of trust."
Let's just review the record. Rubio on Merrick Garland, President Obama's ultimately blockaded nominee to fill the vacancy caused by the death of Antonin Scalia: "I mean, I don't see the point of it. […] I know enough about the position in general to be able to say, number one, I don't think we should be moving on a nominee in the last year of this president's term — I would say that if it was a Republican president — and number two, even if this was the third year of this president's term, this is not someone I'd support."
So he was fine with making up new rules to keep a Democratic nominee off the court, and pretend that was somehow a principled decision. And says he "knew enough" about Garland to not even want to bother with the Senate's advice and consent duties. As if he didn't care, at all, about the integrity of his own institution. Of course, putting "Rubio" and "integrity" in the same thought is an exercise in absurdity.