No one understands that it takes sixty votes to pass non-budget legislation in the Senate because of the filibuster. Apparently this ignorance extends to the editors of the New York Times op-ed page, who let Jean Edward Smith write the following in a piece about changing the number of seats on the Supreme Court:

If the current five-man majority persists in thumbing its nose at popular values, the election of a Democratic president and Congress could provide a corrective. It requires only a majority vote in both houses to add a justice or two.

No, it requires sixty votes, and no Republican will ever vote for such a plan. Hence, court-packing is unlikely to happen again unless one party secures a filibuster-proof Senate majority. In short, the premise of the piece (that such a change is feasible) is false.