Opinion | There is a path to save the Supreme Court from itself

Fortunately, there is no shortage of ideas to return sanity to the court. And there has never been a better time to advance them to the public.

This is also gaining broader support among the public. A Monmouth University poll in September found thatOne popular suggestion is to limit justices to 18-year terms — long enough to maintain independence but not to prevent new justices from refreshing the court. The terms could be staggered so as to give presidents regular opportunities to appoint justices. This, however, might require a constitutional amendment, although supporters argue it can be done by statute.

Antidemocratic developments risk entrenching the judicial philosophy of the current Court majority for generations, while advantaging one political party.the court has already been politicized And for those who caution that Republicans, should they regain full control of Congress, could retaliate and expand the court further: This is a reasonable concern, but as Brian Fallon, co-founder and executive director of the progressive group Demand Justice, tells me, if that happens"we’re no worse off than we are now.”Ethical guardrails already exist for federal courts in the form of the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges, asin the Atlantic.

Uncomfortable being part of the minority numbers on the court? Welcome to the world of conservatives for over fifty years. Funny, we weren't looking for ways to overthrow the system the five decades we were in the minority. Grow up!

JR , the priest from outer space..

Nothing to save. Getting the laws of land a bit more stable. Result of making up laws

The path to save the Supreme Court from itself is to let the Supreme Court save itself. Other branches meddling is unconstitutional.

SC is a mess. Religious zealots have no business inflicting their personal beliefs on an entire country

It doesn't need saving. The Constitution is their guide.

Just remember: the supreme court is only right when they agree with you. If they disagree then they are an illegitimate institution. (Facepalm)

Here, JRubinBlogger shows us just what giant babies liberals are when they don't get their way. Term limits and court packing to make the court less political? You wrote that? You turned that in to an editor knowing it'd be public?

Supreme Court doesn't need saving it's doing its job is meant to do and doing it very well. Democrats just mad because they're cuckoo policies cost them the most powerful position in government.

So if rulings don't go your way, the court is 'illegitimate' now? What are you, a SCOTUS denier?

Not nominating folks solely because of their skin color would be a solid starting point.

hears an idea, scrap all laws except the constitution. and watch the rats and the wokes cry

Jennifer rubin has the political intelligence level as a McDonalds employee who wants to be paid $20 an hour. Only the Wapo would hire her.

Jennifer hasn't been relevant for 10 years. Only the garbage WAPO will employ her.

LOL! You lefties didn't have a problem when it was off-the-rails liberal. Now that it leans a little conservatively, it needs saving? Puh-lease.

Perhaps you should change your name to the Washington Satanic Post. It fits.

Rubin is nothing more than a cartoon character at this point. As predictable as a Threes Company episode

Yeah demand the illegitimate Trump judges resign - they were appointed by a traitor in service to Putin.

Haha Jennifer Rubin. Not worth my time

No.

You mean save the court from the imperfect justices?

Ahh, Rubin comes out with another gem.

🤡 article....... trash actually!

It's abolition?

Changing the number of seats on the Supreme Court for the first time in 170 years for partisan political gain is the definition of authoritarianism

LOL ok goodluck

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Opinion | The Supreme Court’s student loan case tests a president’s powersOpinion by Ruth Marcus: The Supreme Court’s student loan case tests a president’s powers Who need help for Grant and loan if you are interested dm please I didn't know Nancy Pelosi is a Republican We need a border wall more than Student Loan forgiveness.
Source: washingtonpost - 🏆 95. / 72 Read more »

Supreme Court Appears Split on Whether to Allow Partisan Control of ElectionsThe Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that could deliver control of elections to partisan state legislatures and jeopardise protections for the right to vote that are enshrined in nearly every state constitution. The vast majority of Supreme Court decisions have turned out to be bad ones. Perhaps we need to get rid of lifelong terms, and limit service on SCOTUS to no more than one term of, say, 7 years?
Source: truthout - 🏆 69. / 68 Read more »

Evangelical minister who sought to influence Supreme Court comes under withering criticism
Source: WOKVNews - 🏆 247. / 63 Read more »

Evangelical minister who sought to influence Supreme Court comes under withering criticismA conservative evangelical minister testifying before a House committee Thursday came under fierce personal attacks from Republican members of Congress angry that he has accused Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito of leaking news of a 2014 decision ahead of time. And by 'came under personal attack,' we mean that he was systematically proved to have been lying.
Source: YahooNews - 🏆 380. / 59 Read more »

U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear Coinbase arbitration disputeThe U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase Global Inc's bid to halt lawsuits the company contends belong in private arbitration, including one by a user suing after a scammer stole from his account. 🤦‍♂️What a waste of the courts time
Source: Reuters - 🏆 2. / 97 Read more »