What We Know About the Three Legal Fights Hugh Hewitt Flags for Trump

A Fox News opinion column published by Hugh Hewitt argues that the Trump administration faces three looming legal and political fights — over the size of the Supreme Court, statehood for Washington, D.C., and a national popular vote system for electing presidents — and that the administration needs answers on all three before January, according to the column.

The column's headline frames the stakes directly: "Court packing, D.C. statehood, popular vote: Trump needs legal answers now." Hewitt is a longtime conservative radio host and Fox News contributor; the piece runs as opinion commentary, not straight news reporting.

What Three Fights Does Hewitt Flag?

According to the published headline and framing of the column, the three issues are: proposals to change the size of the U.S. Supreme Court (commonly called "court packing"), proposals to grant Washington, D.C. statehood, and proposals to move toward electing the president by national popular vote rather than through the current state-by-state Electoral College process. Hewitt's column argues the administration should have legal responses ready before Congress convenes in January, per the Fox News headline.

What Is "Court Packing" and Why Does It Keep Surfacing?

The size of the Supreme Court is set by federal statute, not the Constitution, and Congress has changed the number of justices several times since the nation's founding before settling at nine in 1869. "Court packing" is the shorthand critics use for proposals to add seats to the current nine-justice bench, a step proponents frame as rebalancing the court and opponents frame as an attempt to engineer outcomes by changing the number of votes rather than the law. The term itself carries a negative connotation and is typically used by opponents of such proposals.

What Would D.C. Statehood Change?

Washington, D.C. residents currently have no voting representation in the U.S. Senate and only a non-voting delegate in the House. Statehood proposals would convert most of the district into the 51st state, giving it two senators and at least one voting House member. Supporters describe this as closing a representation gap for district residents who pay federal taxes and serve in the military; opponents have argued the move would require a constitutional amendment, since the Constitution establishes the federal district as the seat of government, and that it would reshape the partisan composition of the Senate.

How Would a National Popular Vote Change Presidential Elections?

Under the current system, each state awards its Electoral College votes based largely on its own statewide results, and a candidate can win the presidency without winning the most individual votes nationwide. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is an agreement among participating states to award all of their electoral votes to whichever candidate wins the national popular vote, once enough states join to represent a majority of the Electoral College. Supporters say the approach guarantees the presidency goes to the candidate most Americans actually chose; opponents argue it would reduce the influence of smaller and rural states and could be challenged in court as circumventing the constitutional amendment process.

"Trump needs legal answers now." — headline language from Hugh Hewitt's Fox News Opinion column

What Should Readers Watch For Before January?

• Whether congressional Democrats or Republicans introduce formal legislation on any of the three fronts once the new Congress convenes.
• Whether any state legislature moves to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact in the coming months.
• Whether lawmakers or advocacy groups file or signal legal challenges tied to Supreme Court sizing or D.C. statehood.
• Whether the Trump administration or Department of Justice issues public legal guidance responding to any of the three issues, as Hewitt's column urges.

Where Can Readers Read the Full Argument?

Hewitt's column lays out his reasoning for why the administration should prepare legal positions on all three issues ahead of the new year. The full piece, including his specific recommendations, is available at Fox News Opinion.