Daily Beast embarrasses itself with entirely false story on court packing

The Daily Beast published a completely false story on Tuesday in an attempt to slam a former New York Times columnist, apparently taking the word of a co-host from "The View" in pushing Democrats' newly manufactured definition of court packing.

What are the details?

Daily Beast senior writer Matt Wilstein wrote an article titled, "'The View's' Sunny Hostin Schools Bari Weiss on 'Court Packing.'" But it wasn't Hostin who did the schooling. In fact, Weiss is the one who gave "The View's" entire panel a lesson.

Wilstein did not explain what court packing is for The Daily Beast's readership, so TheBlaze reminds everyone that the term "court packing" goes back to when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (D) attempted to add justices to the high court in order to push through his agenda after the Supreme Court had determined parts of his New Deal were unconstitutional.

The concept of adding justices is considered highly controversial. In fact, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden in the past called Roosevelt's attempt to pack the Supreme Court "a bonehead idea" that "put in question" the Supreme Court "for an entire decade." Biden now refuses to say whether he will make the same move if he wins the White House.

During "The View" episode, Hostin, a legal analyst, argued, "We all know the Republican Party has been packing the Supreme Court for decades. They've been packing the judiciary for decades. [President Donald] Trump has put now three justices on the Supreme Court and just dozens and dozens of judges on the federal judiciary. So I think what we're going to see is perhaps the Democrats unpacking the Supreme Court so that there's more of a balance."

Weiss explained, "Packing the Court is about adding more justices to the bench, which is something that people like [Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.)] and [Rep.] Ilhan Omar [D-Minn.] are advocating for. Packing the court doesn't mean appointing justices that some people don't like."

"I think where the conversation is right now, is about whether or not the Democrats — if they win the Senate and if Joe Biden wins — if they're going to fundamentally change the nature of the court as Roosevelt once tried to do," Weiss continued, noting that the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg also voiced opposition to packing the court last year when she told NPR that "nine is a good number."

Weiss went on to call out Biden for refusing to "stand up to the left-wing flank of his party."

"The fact that he has refused on the record to say whether or not he will pack the court I think is very suspicious to some people, and the fact that journalists aren't forcing him to ask that essential question ... is pretty ridiculous as far as I'm concerned," Weiss said.

Hostin insists new definition of court packing means 'balancing'

Co-host Whoopi Goldberg tried to provide cover for Hostin by stepping in and saying the legal analyst was referring to lower courts being packed. But Hostin stood firm, correcting Goldberg and saying, "I was talking about the Supreme Court."

Hostin insisted this new definition of court packing actually meant "balancing" out the court for Democrats, pointing to a Newsweek article from another legal expert who also completely ignored where the term came from and what it means.

She explained to Goldberg:

"I was in particular talking about the Supreme Court being packed and I used those words very specifically. In order to unpack the Supreme Court, meaning unpack the culture, unpack the values that are on the Supreme Court—in order to do that you would have to add either term limits, age limits, or you would have to add justices, which would then balance the Supreme Court, which would lead to an unpacking."

But Weiss was right. She and Hostin sparred over whether or not Biden should provide an answer on whether or not he would add justices, but Weiss was certainly not schooled, and she maintained the same opinion of others in the media, such as CNN's Jake Tapper, who have said Biden should tell voters his plans on the issue before Election Day.

The Daily Beast failed to show Weiss was wrong

Not only did The Daily Beast article fail to explain court packing, it failed to show any evidence of how Weiss was wrong or "schooled," and folks on social media took notice.

In response to the outlet's Twitter post of the story, one person wrote, "When I first heard of the new rhetorical strategy to make up a new definition for court-packing I thought 'there is absolutely no way anyone is stupid enough to buy this.' I was wrong. Daily beast writers and readers are stupid enough to buy it. Fair enough."

Another responded, "Makes the case for Civics Education in schools. And apparently, a badly needed requirement for snarky Daily Beast boys."

Someone else added, "Here's the thing-- the lingo that Hostin is using is WRONG. Bari Weiss is describing it correctly. 'Packing' means adding more judges to the court. 'Un-Packing' doesn't mean anything. It's sad that he uses it as an opportunity to smear @bariweiss for getting it right."

Someone else concluded, "Yeah.... Saw the segment. @bariweiss was correct. Perhaps you guys should change the title to your article. Sunny Hostin perhaps should go back and get 'schooled' on using terms with correct definitions. She looked foolish for it."

Here is the exchange from "The View":

'The View's' Sunny Hostin Schools Bari Weiss on 'Court Packing'

'The View's' Sunny Hostin Schools Bari Weiss on 'Court Packing'www.thedailybeast.com