Posted on 07/28/2024 8:28:47 AM PDT by karpov
President Biden has agreed to step aside, but not to go quietly. In remarks from the Oval Office on Wednesday, he said in his final months “I’m going to call for Supreme Court reform, because this is critical to our democracy.” What a last spasm by a lame duck, demanding a rewrite of the American founding that Kamala Harris will have to defend or disavow.
The specifics await Mr. Biden’s announcement, but the presidential brainstorm has leaked to the press. News reports say Mr. Biden may push for term limits on the Justices, an “enforceable” ethics code, and a constitutional amendment to override their recent 6-3 ruling on presidential immunity. Much of this is unconstitutional, and all of it is radical.
Mr. Biden once understood this. The left has been calling to restructure the Supreme Court since originalist Justices became a majority. In 2020 Mr. Biden, realizing that such proposals might scare voters, promised to set up a commission to study the question. It eventually issued a 294-page report, which Mr. Biden would do well to consult.
Since the Constitution grants Justices life tenure, how are term limits supposed to work? One scheme, debated by Mr. Biden’s commission, is for Congress to pass a law to redefine the judicial office, so that “after eighteen years of service, Justices become Senior Justices and stop participating in the ordinary work of the Court.” Instead they’d “perform a different or a subsidiary set of duties.”
A purported model is the law that lets federal judges take senior status without fully quitting. “Retired Justices such as David Souter and Sandra Day O’Connor have often participated in courts of appeals decisions,” the commission’s report says.
This is not an apt precedent.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Joe Biden: Failing Upward for 50+ Years
“I’m going to call for Supreme Court reform, because this is critical to our democracy.”
I pray for the fall of your “democracy”.
Frikkin degenerates.
Let’s insist Biden explain his S/C plan on broadcast
TV in his own inimitable mumbling, stumbling way.
We’ll soon see where that cockmamie plan goes.
IF TERM LIMITS ARE OK FOR THE SUPREMES——
HOW ABOUT TERM LIMITS FOR EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS???
THERE ARE PLENTY OF DEMS THIS WOULD APPLY TO.
DISCRIMINATION !!!!!!!!!
What he means is this change will allow communist party to rule unopposed.
Biden does good to read what someone else put on the teleprompter. He’s just after the pudding pop he gets if he reads it well.
How's that working in California?
Term limits can't fix a stupid degenerate electorate.
“Congress used to require the Court to hear certain cases. Congress used to regularly expand and update our lower courts to better serve the needs of justice. Congress used to require justices to ride circuit, meaning serving on lower courts in addition to the Supreme Court. Congress has even created different tiers of service for judges and justices.”
“expand the Supreme Court. Doing so in a way that would bring balance to the Court’s current extreme, far-right majority would help ensure the Court better reflects the values of the American people.”
“Instead of having justices serve unchecked for life, we should create term limits that ensure justices serve a uniform number of years. Term limits would give each president the opportunity to appoint the same number of Supreme Court justices each term, reducing partisan gamesmanship around each confirmation and making the Court more democratically representative.”
“Dramatically expanding the number of circuit and district court judgeships will make the judiciary more efficient and more effective, and it will present an opportunity to increase diversity in the judiciary.”
https://demandjustice.org/priorities/supreme-court-reform/
The only problem in all of this is that "their democracy" was a plot to subver our constitution.
Someone needs to get crayons and illustrate the differences of the three Powers and separation thereof of the Constitution for the Dems
his Supreme actions will go nowhere. i am worried about all departments actively booby-trapping levers of power to be activated on a Trump win. this action, first initiated in BO’s last months, hampered DJT greatly for months. i am sure he would clean house this time around but that won’t be enough
Good luck getting the states to vote yes on a constitutional amendment for this. SCOTOS operates independently of Congress and the executive branch.
excuse me while i guffaw over JoeyB giving anyone instructions on ethics. come on, man!
I can see impeachment of a Justice that would have to be voted on by the House and Senate. But it would have to be an offense that reached the impeachable standard.
Frankly, I’m a bit relieved he isn’t going to pack the court with 3 new justices. I’m no expert, but I seem to remember there is no mention of the number of justices on the court in the constitution, which leaves it up to the legislative and executive branch.
That’s how Roosevelt was going to add more justices to get his agenda passed. Fortunately Congress at the time did not go along with it. II don’t think it even needs 2/3rds approval, but I could be wrong. I have ni doubt the greedy, and power hungry Democrats of today would gleefully approve a packing scheme. I hope at least Manchin votes negative and all Republicans hold to stop it if Biden goes down that road.
Instead of entertaining Biden’s ideas we should be rescinding every executive order and law he signed in his current demented state.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/SCOTUS-Report-Final-12.8.21-1.pdf
It’s too much for me to read at this time.
The 2016, 2020, and 2024 Democrat presidential primaries show how the Democrats view democracy.
Correct.
That’s how Roosevelt was going to add more justices to get his agenda passed. Fortunately Congress at the time did not go along with it.
Roosevelt's court-packing plan set off a firestorm in Congress where even people in his own party wouldn't go along with it.
Vice President Garner explained it to FDR like this: "Well, Cap'n, do you want it with the bark on or the bark off?" Garner was referring to a hickory switch used for discipline.
I don’t think it even needs 2/3rds approval, but I could be wrong.
A majority vote in both Houses of Congress would be sufficient to enlarge and pack the Court. However, if filibustered in the Senate, it would require a three-fifths vote to shut off debate and proceed to an actual vote.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.