The Washington Post | April 20th, 2021


DES MOINES -- Last week, Cindy Axne joined Iowa Public Radio's River to River and was asked how she would vote on newly introduced legislation that would expand the Supreme Court from nine to thirteen justices. 

Axne tried to dodge and evade the question. In the process, she lied to Iowans saying, "...we have no jurisdiction over this. This falls directly to the Senate, so I’m going to let them, you know, deal with this.”

Today, The Washington Post gave this claim four Pinocchios and pressed Axne to answer the question - with Axne not providing comment. 


"Axne is a second-term congresswoman from a competitive district in the Midwest. In other words, she is just the kind of politician for whom a question about court-packing can land like a hot potato.


Axne may have been thinking of the Senate’s “advice and consent,” or the power to approve or reject presidential nominees for judgeships and other positions, which the House does not have.

However, to change the composition of the Supreme Court requires legislation, meaning both chambers must vote on the text of the bill and send it to the president for his signature.


Axne’s claim is flat-out wrong. Since the founding of the United States, the House has taken a vote each time a proposal was approved to expand or decrease the number of justices on the Supreme Court. The Senate’s “advice and consent” regarding presidential nominees is altogether a different process.

We asked how Axne made this mistake on the radio and didn’t get a response. Perhaps she misspoke, as happens in interviews every now and then. But we also asked how she would vote on the bill from Nadler and her colleagues, and didn’t get a response to that, either. Put it all together, and it appears Axne is trying to hide the ball on this issue. We award Four Pinocchios."


"Axne needs to answer the question. How would she vote on this bill," said Republican Party of Iowa Communications Director Kollin Crompton. "Right now it appears like Axne is trying to lie to Iowans in order to protect her political career. If that isn't the case, she should correct the record."

Read the full story here.


Share this post