Bernie Sanders floats modified term limits for Supreme Court justices

[Uncle Joe]

(snip)

"There is a growing consensus in the Democratic party that the Supreme Court must be reformed," Fallon told CNN after Sanders spoke. "The only debate is how to best reform it. But no one is any longer defending the status quo of just letting the Roberts Court block progressive proposals for the next 30 years."

The path Sanders discussed is most like one proposed by the scholars Daniel Epps and Ganesh Sitaraman, who have set forth, among other options, what they described last year as a "panel solution."

Spelling out their logic in an op-ed for Vox, the pair suggested it would be possible to "eliminate the high stakes of Supreme Court appointments" by rotating justices, "like a panel on a court of appeals."

"Every judge on the federal court of appeals would also be appointed as an associate justice of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court 'panel' would be composed of nine justices, selected at random from the full pool of associate justices," Epps and Sitaraman wrote. "Once selected, the justices would hear cases for only two weeks, before another set of judges would replace them."


https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/01/politics/bernie-sanders-supreme-court/index.html

This is a thought provoking read.

[LongtimeAZDem]

1. And we have another "Democrats want to throw away the Constitution" talking point

[still_one]

2. You will notice he doesn't give specifics how he would accomplish that, because he can't

[LongtimeAZDem]

3. But, but, "Revolution! Revolution, I tells ya!"

[Uncle Joe]

4. If the U.S. Constitution had never been amended, what would America look like today?

[LongtimeAZDem]

8. Irrelevant. We have a maniac who has shredded the government and our standing in the world

People are looking to return to sanity, and campaigning on changing the Constitution is not going speak to them.

This is a seriously stupid campaign point, even worse than "abolish the Electoral college". It feeds the notion that Democrats cannot win or govern within the rules as they exist.

[crazytown]

13. A simple vote in Congress can reconstitute the Supreme Court

See FDR 1937 for the mechanics and the downsides.

[Uncle Joe]

16. If it to be done, it should be in conjunction with the states promoting a Constitutional Amendment

as well.

Constitutional Amendment Process. ... The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures.

Aug 15, 2016

Constitutional Amendment Process | National Archives
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution

[crazytown]

17. Like the ERA?

[Uncle Joe]

18. Preferably like the 19th Amendment etc. etc.

[crazytown]

19. And secure the approval of GOP states

like ACA extension of Medicaid? America is gridlocked. Your position (in real terms) is do nothing.

[Uncle Joe]

21. I believe under the proposal that Bernie is putting forth, that an overwhelming majority of

of all states would support it.

[crazytown]

23. Bernie should be more radical.

As President he can ask Congress to approve his proposals without a Constitutional Amendment. Getting 60 votes in the Senate, the States House, will be difficult enough. My 2c

[Uncle Joe]

24. He might, the Constitutional Amendment being the best approach is my own opinion.

[crazytown]

20. Addendum.

How likely is it that Democrats in Congress would agree to supporting a Constitutional Amendment when a regular vote through both chambers would suffice?

[Uncle Joe]

22. A Constitutional Amendment gives the people increased voice in the process.

[crazytown]

25. The people do not elect Supreme Court justices.

This is a matter for the Executive, the Congress, and in my opinion the Supreme Court itself. In 1937 the Court was fiercely opposed to FDR’s proposals. If today, the court could coalesce around a particular reform, Proposed by the President, Congress is the appropriate body to enact it.

The Constitution does not specify the number of justices in the Supreme Court. A Constitutional Amendment would set in stone a matter the founding fathers left with the Legislature.

[Uncle Joe]

26. As I mentioned on my post #16

If it to be done, it should be in conjunction with the states promoting a Constitutional Amendment

as well.




Constitutional Amendment Process. ... The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures.

Aug 15, 2016

Constitutional Amendment Process | National Archives
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution

The people have more direct influence at the state level as this process plays out, thus their voices are strengthened.

[crazytown]

27. I understand and respect your reasoning.

Let’s agree to disagree.

[Uncle Joe]

29. Okay cool.

Peace to you crazytown.

[Skidmore]

5. Requires a constitutional amendment

for such a change.

[Uncle Joe]

7. That's correct Skidmore.

[Skidmore]

9. Which is why he

sounds foolish.

[Uncle Joe]

10. So you don't believe the Supreme Court needs reform?

[Skidmore]

11. Reform?

Start by voting for reasonable officeholders who appoint reasonable justices, all of wom respect the rule of law.

[Amimnoch]

15. I believe in reality.

I believe there is no projection that would provide a Congress with a 2/3rds population that will pass any kind of Constitutional amendment.

I believe that had people not decided to sit out 2016, or vote stupidly, we wouldn’t have the issues we have now to need reform.

Want to refrom the SCOTUS? Get a Democratic Party POTUS, and Democratic Party Senate majority (especially now that the filibuster is busted).

Will cause some outrage out there, but we can accomplish the above, and decide to bump the court number by 2 picks to compensate for the theft of Garland. THAT is achievable, and within the realm of reality. Not so sure actually running a campaign on that point is the smart move though, since announcing that as a platform plan could energize the opposition enough to prevent us from getting there. President is possible. Senate is going to be a rough take again this time because of the specific states that are up. I don’t suspect that states like Ohio/Florida/Wisconsin are going to be energized by an expanded SCOTUS population.

[crazytown]

14. Does not require a Constitutional Amendment.

FDR 1937

[Blue_true]

6. I like the idea, but a 9 Judge group should serve for 1 full term before rotating out.

There are several Courts of Appeals, Justices for the Supreme Court should be selected based upon the population of the appeal docket that the serve in, that way more populated areas would get more Justices on the Supreme Court.

[DavidDvorkin]

12. Just stop talking and go away, Sanders.

[Kentonio]

30. Is there a particular reason you think a large section of the party should lose their candidate?

Or is just hearing opinions you don't like a major issue for you generally?

[customerserviceguy]

28. It sounds like an administrative nightmare

Imagine that every two weeks, your team of doctors would change while you're fighting a life-threatening illness or injury.