Biden to announce support for major Supreme Court reforms, Washington Post reports

[Eric]

Finally.

Biden to announce support for major Supreme Court reforms, Washington Post reports

During a call with the Congressional Progressive Caucus on Saturday, Biden said there would be some form of Supreme Court reform that he will be unveiling or seeking, according to a source familiar with the discussion. Biden has previously shunned calls to overhaul the top court by implementing...

www.yahoo.com

US President Joe Biden is preparing to propose a major Supreme Court overhaul in the coming week that would include term limits for justices and an enforceable ethics code, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday citing two sources familiar with the plans.

Biden is also weighing whether to call for a constitutional amendment to eliminate broad presidential immunity, the Post reported, adding that Biden discussed at the move in a video conference with the Congressional Progressive Caucus on Saturday.

Biden has previously shunned calls to overhaul the top court with term limits or by expanding the number of seats on the bench. Some Democrats have made calls for the changes following former President Donald Trump's appointment of three conservative justices.

In October, a bipartisan group of legal experts expressed their support for 18-year term limits for Supreme Court justices as a way to deter partisanship and improve the judiciary's reputation.

 

[Alli]

It’s way past time to do this. It’s also the perfect time to do it.

 

[Herdfan]

All for show.

There is no possible way this will make it through the amendment process. He probably knows this.

 

[Eric]

Agreed, it's a good start and the sentiment is there but certainly nothing will happen before the election. Democrats would not only need to stick to it, they would need a big win in both houses in order to pull it off and that's not looking too good at the moment.

 

[Herdfan]

Agreed, it's a good start and the sentiment is there but certainly nothing will happen before the election. Democrats would not only need to stick to it, they would need a big win in both houses in order to pull it off and that's not looking too good at the moment.

Plus getting 38 states to go along with it.

 

[Renzatic]

Plus getting 38 states to go along with it.

20 years ago, the idea that a president was above the law would've been unimaginable. if the need arised, a constitutional amendment stating such would've received overwhelming support.

Now? "Well, normally I'd be all for limitations on the federal government, but since it's our guy in office..."

 

[Herdfan]

if the need arised, a constitutional amendment stating such would've received overwhelming support.

Add term limits for members of Congress and you may be on to something.

 

[Eric]

20 years ago, the idea that a president was above the law would've been unimaginable. if the need arised, a constitutional amendment stating such would've received overwhelming support.

Now? "Well, normally I'd be all for limitations on the federal government, but since it's our guy in office..."

Can't stop him from being a felon? Make it so felonies don't apply to him all at the hands of the party of "law and order". Reagan is surely rolling over in his grave at what we're witnessing.

 

[Renzatic]

Add term limits for members of Congress and you may be on to something.

Sure. I'm not opposed to that.

 

[GermanSuplex]

The current Supreme Court is is an out of control gaggle of partisan hack grifters. Alito and Thomas are really smug and entitled con artists. Supreme Court as we knew it is over, may as well change it.

 

[Roller]

Add term limits for members of Congress and you may be on to something.

I'm in favor of that. But how many terms for members of the House vs. the Senate? And I'd also like to see the terms change, though that'd be harder to pull off. I think two years is too short and requires House members to devote too much time to campaigning, but six years is too long for the Senate. Maybe four for both?

 

[Yoused]

Add term limits for members of Congress and you may be on to something.

I would be in favor of 3-on/2-off term constraints. Actual n-years-and-done simply creates a congress half-full of lame ducks.

 

[Hrafn]

I would be in favor of 3-on/2-off term constraints. Actual n-years-and-done simply creates a congress half-full of lame ducks.

Plus, it would seem this would shift everyone to the "get what you can, and fast, since you don't have long" mentality that overwhelms most companies. Although you still have ghouls like Moscow Mitch, there were a number of congress critters willing to work together across the isle for the common good.

Embarrassingly few of those, though.

 

[Yoused]

Although you still have ghouls like Moscow Mitch, there were a number of congress critters willing to work together across the isle for the common good.

The best approach to that would be a retirement age for all politicians. I would put it at 62 (after your 62nd birthday, your vote in Congress is not counted) and provide for emertius posts that would allow old fogeys to pontificate on the floor and offer sage advice to the young'uns.

 

[Alli]

The best approach to that would be a retirement age for all politicians. I would put it at 62 (after your 62nd birthday, your vote in Congress is not counted) and provide for emertius posts that would allow old fogeys to pontificate on the floor and offer sage advice to the young'uns.

62 is wayyyyyy too young. 75 would be better. Emeritus positions are unnecessary and would waste valuable time.

 

[Roller]

62 is wayyyyyy too young. 75 would be better. Emeritus positions are unnecessary and would waste valuable time.

Agree - there are many people older than 62 who lead companies with the wisdom that can only be acquired by experience. Maybe 70-75, or possibly require tests of mental competency above a certain age.

But the underlying problem is that the current system makes it attractive and easy for officeholders to remain on the gravy train for decades without repercussions.