… be looked at... two have possibly committed perjury. I know it's not common to investigate for every dishonest or possibly dishonest remark... but this is the Supreme Court... the standard should be very high. Judges that even remotely lie under oath should be removed from the court. Moreover, there should be some prison time. Not punishing liars mean lies will become acceptable. Barr should also be investigated...

And sets a spectacularly bad precedent. For all their bullshit, the Republicans could have wiped the legislative filibuster and completely packed the court to push it fully hard right (it's not there today, mostly thanks to Roberts crntrr-right stances). They didn't. If we do it as a partisan power grab it undermines everything we've been been saying about Republican manipulation of the system and opens the door to a real nightmare many years from now when the right does eventually get power again.

I would rather suck up the current court and change the approval criteria to require a much higher bar to appoint, so no one can be put on the court in the future without bipartisan approval. Something like 2/3rds in the house and Senate. Prevent discussion of any other items while there is a vacancy to prevent stalling.

just looking for ways to push his agenda without appearing partisan.

He could have absolutely screwed us with the census ruling. He was the deciding factor to save most of the ACA. He is believed to be the reason the court has largely refused to consider challenges to gun restrictions.

He might not be reliable or predictable, but he goes against the Pub party on big ticket items often enough that I disagree with characterizing him as purely partisan.

The Court was already being portrayed as too partisan when the ACA came up. The bill was constructed as a tax and Congress has that power so overruling it entirely would have been too obvious. Instead he sided with the liberal wing while inserting the poison pill of optional Medicaid expansion. It could have destroyed the functionality--and I think certainly damaged it, and lowered its potential popularity.

The census question was similarly open-and-shut, but he didn't rule it out completely...just sent it back for a do-over.

He's also the one who declared (as Charles Pierce puts it) "the Day of Jubilee" on the Voting Rights Act because, you know, we elected a black president so racism is no longer a problem.

What other "big ticket items" has he decided in our favor?

over how they were appointed, how they are partisan, conflicts of interest, and how they adhere to their own unconstitutional political agenda.

Doubt it will happen (we are screwed) but that is a better path than a partisan expansion of the court.