House Majority Leader Steve Scalise on Tuesday told Fox Business News his caucus will this week be bringing up a constitutional amendment to cap the size of the Supreme Court bench at nine justices, signaling to whoever the hell it is sitting in for Maria Bartiromo and her audience that the Republican Party establishment is now taking seriously the still-theoretical threat of a dismantling of the permanently-entrenched conservative power structure’s most important and durable bulwark.

Or at least seriously enough to take the time to vote on this amendment instead of, say, a bill to help reduce Americans’ electricity bills (in the second half of the above clip Scalise said the House will be investigating the alleged Chinese propaganda campaign against data centers so maybe don’t hold your breath for a vote on the Ratepayer Protection Act). But still not really that seriously since, well, constitutional amendments are kind of hard to get passed and Scalise appears to be betting correctly that Fox Business News viewers don’t understand that. Scalise might as well be pushing it as a non-binding resolution because the practical impact on the politics involved will be the same.

Actually scratch that: A non-binding resolution would be a significantly better idea here because it will pass by a simple majority and give the GOP a rhetorical win on the issue. A constitutional amendment vote, which will fail by coming up very well short of the two-thirds required in the House and the Senate – long before it also will fail to be passed by two thirds of the state legislatures. A resolution, even if passed along party lines, could at least be sold as an affirmation of maintaining the status quo, whereas a failed two-thirds supermajority loss will not only land to the opposite effect in simple kayfabe terms, but probably even add some momentum to the already snowballing movement to abolish the filibuster and then pack the court with as many as six more liberal justices.

Voting “no” on this amendment is actually a dry run for a yes to expand the court in 2029, which is not exactly a minus on the campaign trail if you want to turn out the most engaged and democracy-minded parts of the Dem base. Probably moreso than voting yes does for the typical House Republican. Like yeah, no shit, of course they’re against expanding the Supreme Court. On the flip side not all of the Democratic voter base has been sold on the importance of the goal and what it means as far ensuring that the fucking atrocities of the past decade never happen again.

Yes, it’s just one stupid, ill-advised House vote that will excite the kind of MAGA voter who’s tuned in enough to be aware of the looming danger of the Dems upending the Supreme Court while paradoxically also being stupid enough to think that putting the amendment on the floor is basically the same as it being added the constitution – which by the way would take years longer to be actually passed and put into practice than any post-2029 Dem trifecta’s bench-size reform would.

Still it’s Scalise’s impotent and arguably counterproductive gesture, his Orange God Emperor’s on-and-off-again Truth Social posting, and other scattered pants-pissing on the right that speak to a serious apprehension with no real serious plan other than just try not to lose elections. That the lame Washington Examiner op-ed Trump posted on Monday night says it right there – and warns that a Dem reform would mean that the Supreme Court “would cease to function as an independent branch of government and would instead become an extension of electoral politics,” telling you all you need to know about how “principled” and “razor sharp” their arguments will be.

Just a shame that Lindsey Graham won’t be around to see it.

Anyway Scalise and Co just wrapped up a presser and shared more of their masterful legislative strategy about the amendment vote in their remarks to reporters.