The battle over Supreme Court term limits
President Biden's proposed reform meets GOP backlash
Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court have lifetime appointments. President Joe Biden thinks that should change. This week he introduced a series of proposed court reforms that include limiting justices to a single 18-year term. "We have had term limits for presidents for nearly 75 years," Biden said in an op-ed for The Washington Post. "We should have the same for Supreme Court justices." The proposal would give each president two court picks per term, he said, making the timing "more predictable and less arbitrary."
Term limits would "lead to a fairer court," the University of Pennsylvania's Kermit Roosevelt III said at Time. Right now, appointments happen only when a justice "dies unexpectedly," or when a "sitting justice feels inclined to let the president appoint a successor." But Republicans see Biden's proposal as an attack on the court's current 6-3 conservative supermajority, said CNN. Democrats want to alter the court, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said, "simply because they disagree with some of the court's recent decisions."
An 'intensely politicized' judiciary
A big problem for Biden's proposal: Lifetime terms are written into the Constitution. It would take an amendment to write them out. "A Constitutional amendment will not pass," Ian Millhiser said at Vox. The idea of judicial term limits has been around for a while — then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry promoted the notion in a 2010 book. But that was before conservatives gained the majority. Republicans are likely to fight — and defeat — any proposal that makes changes. "Term limits endanger GOP control of the judiciary."
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
"Term limits could address some of the woes plaguing the court," legal scholars Adam Chilton, Daniel Epps, Kyle Rozema and Maya Sen said at Washington Monthly. The irregularity of Supreme Court appointments has made the process "intensely politicized" when openings do occur. No wonder: Donald Trump had three appointments in his single presidential term; Jimmy Carter got none. Biden has had just one opportunity. On such vagaries does court control depend. "Why should one president have the opportunity to appoint three times as many justices as his successor?"
Purging conservative justices?
"The left continues these moves to take over the Supreme Court because they are angry about recent decisions that have not gone their way," former Attorney General William Barr and First Liberty Institute's Kelly Shackelford said at Fox News. The term limits proposal is a "partisan move to purge the Supreme Court of conservative justices" like Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas. If Biden's proposed reforms passed, the judiciary will become "little more than a political tool of whomever holds power."
Term limits make "enormous sense," the University of California's Erwin Chemerinsky said in The New York Times. But they're unlikely to become reality anytime soon. This means the presidential race between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris means more for the future of the Supreme Court. If Trump wins, Thomas and Alito might retire to seal Republican control of the court. Similarly, if Democrats win, Justice Sonia Sotomayor could resign to make way for a liberal successor. No reforms will change the way the Supreme Court works, at least anytime soon. "But the presidential election will."
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Joel Mathis is a writer with 30 years of newspaper and online journalism experience. His work also regularly appears in National Geographic and The Kansas City Star. His awards include best online commentary at the Online News Association and (twice) at the City and Regional Magazine Association.
-
Donald Trump’s week in Asia: can he shift power away from China?Today's Big Question US president’s whirlwind week of diplomacy aims to bolster economic ties and de-escalate trade war with China
-
The Icelandic women’s strike 50 years onIn The Spotlight The nation is ‘still no paradise’ for women, say campaigners
-
Mall World: why are people dreaming about a shopping centre?Under The Radar Thousands of strangers are dreaming about the same thing and no one sure why
-
Will Republicans kill the filibuster to end the shutdown?Talking Points GOP officials contemplate the ‘nuclear option’
-
Why the White House is behind a rare Supreme Court push to limit gun ownershipIN THE SPOTLIGHT Justices are preparing to dive back into the choppy waters of the Second Amendment as the White House pushes to penalize recreational narcotic users
-
Supreme Court points to gutting Voting Rights Actspeed read States would no longer be required to consider race when drawing congressional maps
-
‘An exercise of the Republicans justifying their racist positions’instant opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
Are inflatable costumes and naked bike rides helping or hurting ICE protests?Talking Points Trump administration efforts to portray Portland and Chicago as dystopian war zones have been met with dancing frogs, bare butts and a growing movement to mock MAGA doomsaying
-
Supreme Court: Judging 20 years of RobertsFeature Two decades after promising to “call balls and strikes,” Chief Justice John Roberts faces scrutiny for reshaping American democracy
-
Supreme Court rules for Fed’s Cook in Trump feudSpeed Read Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook can remain in her role following Trump’s attempts to oust her
-
Supreme Court to consider gutting agency autonomySpeed Read The court’s three liberals dissented
