Biden Calls For Supreme Court Reform
President Joe Biden wrote a piece for the Washington Post today where he lays out three reforms he now supports: a strong code of ethics for the Supreme Court, term limits for Supreme Court justices, and a constitutional amendment that clearly states that presidents are not above the law. All are good ideas and having the president get behind them is even better. But forgive me if there's also the feeling that Biden's move comes way too late to change anything any time soon. It feels like nothing more than political posturing, at this point.
Here's what Biden is now calling for (emphasis in original):
This nation was founded on a simple yet profound principle: No one is above the law. Not the president of the United States. Not a justice on the Supreme Court of the United States. No one.
. . .
First, I am calling for a constitutional amendment called the No One Is Above the Law Amendment. It would make clear that there is no immunity for crimes a former president committed while in office. I share our Founders' belief that the president's power is limited, not absolute. We are a nation of laws -- not of kings or dictators.
Second, we have had term limits for presidents for nearly 75 years. We should have the same for Supreme Court justices. The United States is the only major constitutional democracy that gives lifetime seats to its high court. Term limits would help ensure that the court's membership changes with some regularity. That would make timing for court nominations more predictable and less arbitrary. It would reduce the chance that any single presidency radically alters the makeup of the court for generations to come. I support a system in which the president would appoint a justice every two years to spend 18 years in active service on the Supreme Court.
Third, I'm calling for a binding code of conduct for the Supreme Court. This is common sense. The court's current voluntary ethics code is weak and self-enforced. Justices should be required to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have financial or other conflicts of interest. Every other federal judge is bound by an enforceable code of conduct, and there is no reason for the Supreme Court to be exempt.
As I said, these are all good ideas and I would love to see all of them implemented. The Supreme Court is completely out of control and their ruling on presidential immunity is a travesty of justice that sits just waiting to blow up in our faces at some future date. Their refusal to police their own ranks in any way is also reprehensible. Limiting justices to 18-year terms is an excellent idea too.
But at least one of these (if not all of them) would require actually amending our Constitution to achieve. What would happen if Congress actually passed a Supreme Court ethics reform law or dictated term limits to the justices? With the current makeup of the court, they'd accept a case challenging it and swiftly declare both laws unconstitutional, leaving us back at square one. They'd insist that the branches of power were completely separate, therefore Congress couldn't force the Supreme Court to do anything. That seems the likeliest outcome, at any rate.
Amending the Constitution in today's political environment seems completely impossible. Two-thirds of Congress and three-fourths of the state legislatures would have to agree on any changes, and that doesn't seem very likely any time soon. Donald Trump already came out against what Biden is calling for, which pretty much guarantees any push right now to amend the Constitution is destined to fail.
Even if you do believe that Congress could pass the Supreme Court reforms and a president could sign them into law (thus forcing the Supreme Court to change its ways), how likely is that to happen when it would require 60 votes in the Senate and passage through a Republican-controlled House of Representatives?
Which is why it's pretty obvious that Biden is doing nothing more than political posturing. What is really going on is that this was a policy initiative that Biden had planned on running for re-election on, as an aspirational goal to tackle with a new (and hopefully Democratically-controlled) Congress next year.
Like many political positions Biden has taken as president, he had to be led to this one rather reluctantly. Earlier in his term, he convened a special presidential commission to study the high court for possible reforms. But they didn't make concrete recommendations, and Biden has mostly ignored what they did manage to agree on until now. If Biden had pushed for these things earlier in his term, they probably still wouldn't have been enacted but at least he could have increased public pressure for action by now. His creation of the toothless commission was merely an effort to defuse the issue politically and make it look like Biden was actually doing something. Now it just feels like too little, too late.
But who knows -- perhaps not. Kamala Harris could pick this torch up too and carry it into the future. If Harris is elected president and if Democrats shock everyone by retaining control of the Senate and regaining control of the House perhaps they could get some court ethics reforms passed. It's certainly worth trying, that's for sure.
Joe Biden signaled he was going to unveil this policy a while back, while he was still actively running for re-election. It got postponed after the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. Since Biden isn't running anymore, he is now a lame duck, meaning the chances of any of it happening before next year are virtually nil.
But these are good planks in the Democratic platform nonetheless. It may take years to accomplish any of them, but it's a worthwhile effort for the party to make. The proposals will outlive Biden's term in office but if any of them are passed in the years to come he will still be able to (partially) count it as part of his own legacy. All three of Biden's proposals would fix glaring holes in American government as it stands today, and all three would push back on the most radically conservative court America has seen in generations. So I support Biden's proposals, but at the same time I think it's going to be a very long road to travel before we see any of them actually enacted.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
They said he was entitled to just have them assassinated. Calling for a constitutional amendment is pretty mild by comparison. They can just ignore it, same as they ignore what's already in the Constitution. Still, it's more of a response than I expected from any Democratic politician.
Constitutional Amendment!!?????
BBBBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Apologies, but that's REALLY funny.. :D
THAT's going to fly!! {/sarc}
President Joe Biden wrote a piece for the Washington Post
Who???
Oh yea... Basement Biden... The guy who President Trump beat down so badly that Basement Biden had to quit the race!!
I'm just saying... :D
. It feels like nothing more than political posturing, at this point.
Yep, that's EXACTLY what it is...
It's a doddering old senile dementia riddled fool DESPERATE to be relevant..
They'd insist that the branches of power were completely separate, therefore Congress couldn't force the Supreme Court to do anything. That seems the likeliest outcome, at any rate.
Again... EXACTLY factually accurate...
Can you imagine what that would do to our republic if the POTUS was stymied by fear of criminal prosecution??
Our republic would CEASE TO EXIST!!!...
No country has ever been saved by good men.. Because good men will not go to the lengths required.
-Horace Walpole
All of this BS is nothing but a Demcorat wet dream that has absolutely ZERO chance of actually happening..
Leave it to senile dementia-riddled Biden to waste time on nothing but a wet dream...
Dan,
They said he was entitled to just have them assassinated.
Not factually accurate...
Still, it's more of a response than I expected from any Democratic politician.
Still, it's more of a response than I expected from any Democratic politician.
Really?? You call wasting time on a wet dream a worthwhile response??
Granted, Basement Biden IS the lamest of lame ducks...
So, I guess it is to be expected, eh?? :D
Third, I'm calling for a binding code of conduct for the Supreme Court. This is common sense. The court's current voluntary ethics code is weak and self-enforced. Justices should be required to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have financial or other conflicts of interest. Every other federal judge is bound by an enforceable code of conduct, and there is no reason for the Supreme Court to be exempt.
Tell ya what, Demcorats…
You pass a law that severely punishes Congresscritters for making money from stocks that they get insider info on and forbids Congresscritters from have ANY stocks....
Pass THAT law and THEN we can talk about the SCOTUS...
Mmmmm 'kay???
LIZ!!!! So happy to see you!!! Thought we lost you for a bit there..
I was just going to say something about juvenile name-calling. Heh. Glad I held off. Hehehehehehe
I'll make the same deal I always make you that the Trump/America hating Demcorats here ALWAYS seem to renege...
No name calling at all..
Just simple pure adult and considerate discussions like we used to have before President Trump wiped the floor with Hillary, every Demcorat lost their fraking minds and the trolls showed up...
You want to make it like it was before all that, I am game...
Just get everyone else to follow the same and we're off... :D
Glad to see ya... :D
Hey, Michale!
Just simple pure adult and considerate discussions...
I've recently concluded that sort of thing isn't possible around here. :(
@m,
i think that was aimed at me.
And, in other news....
Biden’s new Supreme Court reform proposals are mostly useless
The president is finally going after the high court, but his ideas are pretty weak.
On Monday, President Joe Biden announced three proposals to reform the Supreme Court: term limits for justices, a binding code of Supreme Court ethics, and a constitutional amendment overturning the Court’s decision allowing sitting presidents to violate the criminal law. Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party’s presumptive presidential nominee, also endorsed the proposals.
But if you’re hoping these ideas will rein in a Court that’s essentially become the policymaking arm of the Republican Party, expect to be disappointed. Amending the Constitution is virtually impossible — it requires approval from three-quarters of the states — so Biden’s proposal to amend the Constitution to overturn the presidential immunity decision in Trump v. United States (2024) is almost certainly dead on arrival. Similarly, the term limits proposal is at odds with Article III of the Constitution, which provides that justices “shall hold their offices during good behaviour,” language that’s historically been understood to protect judges unless they engage in serious misconduct. So that proposal is equally dead.
This comes from uber Demcorat water carrier VOX.. Ya'all just HAVE to know that things must be really REALLY bad for Demcorats if they can't even keep their water carriers on board.. :D
Liz,
I've recently concluded that sort of thing isn't possible around here. :(
Not impossible. Just very VERY difficult.. :D All that needs to happen is that their be universal and consistent condemnation of those who would violate the ONLY ADULT AND CONSIDERATE DISCUSSIONS rule..
THAT has always been the stumbling block.. The consistency in the condemnations..
I am doing my part by ignoring the trolls who just want to fight and who never has anything worthwhile to actually contribute..
We build on that.. :D
Joshua,
You are very perceptive - most of that was aimed at you. I wish that it were not the case.
Michale,
I am doing my part by ignoring the trolls who just want to fight and who never has anything worthwhile to actually contribute..
That actually gives me hope for this place.
In that case, I'll make sure I continue.. :D
What's your take on Presidential Immunity??
I mean, it's ALWAYS been the case that Presidents have complete criminal immunity from actions they take on behalf of the country.. It's always been understood and accepted..
It wasn't until Democrats forced the issue that it had to be codified..
But can you see how utterly unwieldy the presidency would be if the presidents had to worry about criminal charges after they leave office??
Leonard Leo warns Biden-Harris efforts to radically overhaul Supreme Court could 'backfire'
Constraining judges because of political disagreements makes country look like 'banana republic,' conservative activist says
Exactly...
It's exactly like pursuing a political rival for what are, in essence, jaywalking "crimes" solely for political reasons..
It's so typical of Democrats... Ignoring the long-term consequences SOLELY for a CHANCE (a SMALL chance) at a short term political gain..
Harry Reid did it with his killing of the judicial filibuster that directly lead to a 6-3 Conservative SCOTUS and Democrats tried to use lawfare persecutions to achieve a political end which forced the SCOTUS to codify ABSOLUTE presidential immunity..
And now Democrats are trying to start a war between the Executive branch and the Judicial branch..
Ya'all just HAVE to know where this is heading, right???
Ya'all just HAVE to realize how off the rails hysterical Democrats are, right??
I mean, seriously... Why don't Democrats just have President Trump killed and be done with it...
Oh wait.. They tried that. And missed...
Which simply proves the age old adage..
If you are going to try and kill the king, you better KILL the king..
Acting Secret Service Chief Played Key Role in Limiting Resources for Trump
Acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe was directly involved in denying additional security resources and personnel, including counter snipers, to former President Trump’s rallies and events – despite repeated requests by the agents assigned to Trump’s detail in the two years leading up to his July 13 attempted assassination, according to several sources familiar with the decision-making.
Hmmmmm…
It's almost as if the USSS leadership didn't WANT President Trump to be fully predicted...
But.. THAT couldn't be the case....
Could it??
Trump doubles down on Christians never needing to vote again. What is this "fix"? Sounds like policy. What is it?
Then to other groups he spews crap like:
Listen, we don’t need votes,” Trump said. He added: “We don’t need votes. We have to stop — focus, don’t worry about votes.
And why should his followers not worry about the votes? Christians need to get out and vote so they never have to again but others need not worry about it? WTF. Either way it sounds like some seriously criminal shit, or he is a lot more demented than his handlers are letting on. Possibly both...
I see Harris is doubling down on her Foreign Policy boneheaded moves..
Kamala Harris’s Gift to Hamas
She relieves pressure on the terror group to agree to release Israeli hostages.
Israel didn’t yield to Mr. Biden and in May entered Rafah, cutting off Hamas’s last lifeline to the world. Mr. Biden found himself facing troubles of his own at home, while his presidential rival, whose only complaint against Israel was that it wasn’t destroying Hamas fast enough, began climbing in the polls. Suddenly, Hamas showed it could be flexible. It begged to restart negotiations even as Israel dropped 9 tons of precision bombs on its chief of staff, and agreed not to end the war.
By adopting the anti-Israel narrative, Ms. Harris is giving Hamas’s leader, Yahya Sinwar, every reason in the world to refuse a hostage deal. Why give Israel the hostages without ending the war if there is a possibility the 47th president will force Israel to end it anyway? “Let’s get the deal done so we can get a cease-fire to end the war,” Ms. Harris said Thursday, distancing the deal with her words.
Apparently, given all the facts, it's obvious that Harris is the candidate Hamas wants in office..
Funny how that is, eh. :eyeroll:
Bashi
15
Rachel Maddow points out there are fully seventy election denialists holding office in six swing states. Some have already refused to certify recent election results. (6:31)
This means that even if Dems win the war, Repugs have it rigged to win the peace. Or at least contest it maybe throw it to the state legislators blah blah blah we’ve seen it before. Trump is saying the quiet parts out loud.
one of my biggest concerns about Biden stepping down was and continues to be kamala's more flexible (and less experienced) views on israel and Gaza. Biden has balanced the issue about as perfectly as an American president can.
Kamala may not.
Donald... well, I don't approve of his methods, but i'm not concerned that he might throw our Israeli allies under the bus.
@m,
wherever you're quoting on the topic doesn't make a whole lot of sense. as far as I know, Kamala hasn't staked a public position yet, beyond supporting the Biden administration's policy. does your source have additional verified information, or are they just speculating?
JL
@liz,
you're not a helpless victim in the process. if you're dissatisfied with the tone of the discussion directed toward you, you can change the tone of the discussion coming from you. no dramatic exit required.
nypoet22-
Looks like an opinion piece from the WSJ. Why Michale has become so feeble as to have lost the ability to attribute his quotes...who knows.
Personally I found Kamala's quote:
Israel has a right to defend itself, and how it does so matters," Harris told reporters Thursday. "It is time for this war to end. And end in a way that Israel is secure, all the hostages are released, the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can exercise their right to freedom, dignity and self-determination.
Quite good. Not specific policy but the tone I absolutely agree with, and I think a lot of America does too.
@bashi,
It's a glittering generality, the propaganda strategy most favored by a certain former governor of Alaska. lots of lofty end-goals, not word one about process or logistics.
Cad,
Rachel Maddow points out there are fully seventy election denialists holding office in six swing states. Some have already refused to certify recent election results.
You mean election denialist like Hillary Clinton and all of you who were taken in by the Russia Collusion Delusion??
THAT kind of denialist?? :D
This means that even if Dems win the war, Repugs have it rigged to win the peace.
Nothing?? Nothing from anyone??? {{sssiiiigggghhhhhh}}
JL,
Donald... well, I don't approve of his methods, but i'm not concerned that he might throw our Israeli allies under the bus.
EXACTLY... I mean, if someone was going to be a ONE ISSUE voter, I would think that the very survival of Israel would be that ONE ISSUE...
wherever you're quoting on the topic doesn't make a whole lot of sense. as far as I know, Kamala hasn't staked a public position yet, beyond supporting the Biden administration's policy. does your source have additional verified information, or are they just speculating?
Harris' public position is clear.. Ironically enough, it's the same public position as HAMAS... Hamas and Harris wants to end the war in Israel with Hamas' fighting capability as intact as possible..
Israel wants to DESTROY Hamas... PERMANENTLY...
THAT is the goal that every patriotic American should also want..
Wouldn't you agree???
you're not a helpless victim in the process. if you're dissatisfied with the tone of the discussion directed toward you, you can change the tone of the discussion coming from you. no dramatic exit required.
That's the lesson I have learned.. :D
It's a glittering generality, the propaganda strategy most favored by a certain former governor of Alaska. lots of lofty end-goals, not word one about process or logistics.
Which, ironically enough, has been a LOT of the Democrat process the last 3 years... A lot of glittery generalities, lot of hoopla propaganda but not a word on how...
Much like Biden's latest SCOTUS announcement, eh?? :D
Schumer won't commit to Senate votes for Biden’s long-shot radical SCOTUS overhaul
President Biden's sweeping SCOTUS proposal stands little chance of clearing significant hurdles in a divided Congress
Even Schumer is not going to help Biden destroy the country by destroying the SCOTUS...
There is not a snowballs chance in hell of Biden's SCOTUS attacks will work...
On Saturday afternoon, a Hezbollah rocket fired from southern Lebanon struck a soccer field in the village of Majdal Shams in Israel’s north, killing 12 children.
And yet, Harris, Biden and the Democrats want to bind Israel...
Where is the logic in that???
THIS is awesome as hell!!!! :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlgBq_MxzX4
I guess it's true....
The Left can't meme!!! :D
you're not a helpless victim in the process. if you're dissatisfied with the tone of the discussion directed toward you, you can change the tone of the discussion coming from you. no dramatic exit required.
Hey, Joshua, not sure where all that came from!
I'm not dissatisfied with the tone directed at me nor do I think there has been anything wrong with the tone coming from me. I just don't think many of the regulars around here are ready to stop the childish name-calling.
As for dramatic exits, I've never been into that sort of thing. No, I'm just not going to be very active in the comments sections now that Biden is on his way out of the picture - he was my primary raison d'etre for being here, you know. I'll still be lurking around and making the odd comment here and there ... so, be good! :)