Biden set to announce support for major Supreme Court changes
Biden set to announce support for major Supreme Court changes
The president has discussed the plans with constitutional scholars and members of Congress in recent weeks.
President Biden is finalizing plans to endorse major changes to the Supreme Court in the coming weeks, including proposals for legislation to establish term limits for the justices and an enforceable ethics code, according to two people briefed on the plans.
He is also weighing whether to call for a constitutional amendment to eliminate broad immunity for presidents and other constitutional officeholders, the people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations.
The announcement would mark a major shift for Biden, a former chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who has long resisted calls to reform the high court. The potential changes come in response to growing outrage among his supporters about recent ethics scandals surrounding Justice Clarence Thomas and decisions by the new court majority that have changed legal precedent on issues including abortion and federal regulatory powers.
When people bitch and moan about leftists not falling in line behind presidents, it's because we want shit like this to happen. If Biden was polling favorably and had no detractors, I doubt we would see him attempting to tackle something like this.
This is good news though, and marks the first steps on a long journey to establishing a legitimate Supreme Court once more.
237People on the right know what they're capable of so they try to protect themselves from the consequences while also trying to make sure that everyone else can't do those things by reducing everyone's rights.
People on the left can't imagine what people on the right are capable of because they have the same reflection, they know what they themselves are capable of and imagine that others are the same, so they don't take preventive measures before it blows up in their face.
Hence, Biden not taking advantage of the total immunity he's got.
10This, 100%. And to pile on, any effort that doesn’t include expanding the size of the Supreme Court to 13 is too little, too late.
It’s like the DNC holding abortion rights over everyone’s heads instead of actually doing something about it for decades.
-19I float this from time to time: eliminate the fixed size. Open a new vacancy on the court every other year, first and third years of the presidential term. When a justice dies or retires, we remove their seat; it does not create a new vacancy. We just keep adding life-term justices on a slow, fixed schedule. I would expect the court would eventually vary in size from about 17 to 20 justices.
We would need emergency procedures to reconstitute a court if it ever falls below 7; I'd establish a line of succession from the most senior chief judge of the circuit courts, down to the most junior.
I'd also provide a limited means for a president to bypass a hostile, politically-motivated Senate. The chief judges of the circuit courts were previously confirmed by the Senate and are already in the SCOTUS line of succession established above. They are pre-confirmed. They can be elevated to a regular vacancy without additional confirmation. This gives a pool of 13 veto-proof candidates for the president to choose from if the Senate decides to play games.
13Do you think there is any settled law the Supreme Court wouldn't have struck down?
These are not legal opinions that have solid reasoning. Just like people trying to get other religions recognized in public schools.
It will not fly because the people you are arguing with would rather your voice be removed from the public debate, whatever means necessary.
You can't be clever to a fascist and win. Not only that way at least.
4
How is he going to get anything through the Republican house or even the Senate without a Democratic super majority?
86Proposing the changes could excite the voters enough to give him control of both chambers. Even announcing it might shift the needle for some fence sitters.
179This is the most annoying part about politics.
16How many times have the DNC lead people to the polls with big promises, then half way, if at all, deliver? Ive been able to vote since Reagan and its been the same thing every election. This is stuff he should have tried to tackle his first or second year. We are 15 seconds to the end of the fourth quarter and hes trying to throw a Hail Mary in the wrong direction
-11
It would involve winning the Presidency and both houses of Congress in the next election, and then nuking the Filibuster.
23keeping republicans from retaining the house and taking the senate and white house is pretty much mandatory at this point.
22So it's a completely empty promise.
Democrats will never nuke the filibuster. Ever. It's what lets them pretend their hands are tied when they kill progressive legislation they ran on but never had any intention of ever implementing.
They would rather lose Democracy forever than abandon the relic of Jim Crow they use for its intended purpose.
2Theyve had a shit ton of opportunities to kill the filibuster, but dont want to lose that rotating villain.
-14
Even if it doesn't pass the house or senate, it shows that he's trying something and isn't just giving up.
6We tried nothing and are all out of ideas
-3
There's this little event happening in November that can change things.
6
This is what i’m talking about. Let’s go, Joe.
45He is also weighing whether to call for a constitutional amendment to eliminate broad immunity for presidents
"On the one hand, a president shouldn't be allowed to order Seal Team 6 to kill someone. On the other hand, my neighbor's dog keeps shitting in my yard."
How is this a question?
42You need 75% of the states to ratify an amendment. Even if Biden wins the election, you think the GOP ruled state legislatures will voluntarily restrict the powers of the next GOP president? The most threatening part of Project 2025 is that it only requires the next Republican President. They'll bet on Biden not using those powers the Supreme Court invented so that the next Republican President will.
34And they'll win that bet. No Democrat has the guts to use those powers to fight fascism.
14I mean they might if we all start marching with guns outside their homes. Building Guillotines in the courtyards of their offices. Letting them know that there are consequences to their inaction. Because that's where we're at. You can't pretend otherwise. If they're going to say they're behind a law that says elected officials can commit any crimes they want on the populace they need to know that we will murder them for it. It's as simple as that. If the rule of law, honor, common sense, respect for democracy, even human decency doesn't cause them to do the right thing then Force has to. They say it's a revolution and it'll be peaceful if we don't resist, we have to resist.
1
Do republicans ever pass any legislation supported by democrats anymore? What’s the last bill that was passed?
23Genocide still enjoys broad bipartisan support.
23I think CHIPS
3
I'm so fucking glad we've got a president who can at least handle this moment responsibly. Biden may not be everything people want but he's not seizing this moment to forward his own personal agenda. I think he is pretty clearly trying to find a more ethical path forward. I don't think we can say that about all of our past presidents.
19He's trying to seize the moment to keep his job, nothing else
-5If Joe Biden wanted to suddenly find an ethical path, he should start with Gaza.
This proposal is not a sign of newfound morality, it is red meat to his base that are desperate for any signs of life. It's easy to make promises like this when you never have to fulfill them.
-18Unfortunately the echo chamber is here in full force. You are 100% right. All these promises are dead in the water with the current house/senate. There is virtually a 0% chance any of these promises get fulfilled.
And you are right about Israel as well. Why he is allowing a genocide to take place with American money and weapons is beyond me.
-2
And this is why you should work to enshrine a good thing when it's still good. Because if you don't and it gets corrupted, you're too late.
Resisting stuff like term limits and ethics codes makes no sense.
9Here is a guest link for that article: https://wapo.st/4bGC9gI
7Red Meat
2...for the rabid dogs
-10
The way he’s making sweeping promises gives the impression that he’s confident that he’ll never be in a position to carry them out.
-10Three and a half years later.
Edit: genuinely curious why the downvotes? The left has been calling for the since day one, back when Democrats controlled both houses of Congress. But he's making it an issue now, when he doesn't have control of the House, just in time for Trump to possibly win and actually pull it out?
-19Biden LITERALLY CAN DO ANYTHING HE WANTS as long as it's a Presidential Act! I'm GLAD the Democratic Nominee is SUCH a Fearless Leader!
-21Supreme Court reform is necessary, but this is not an election issue. This is the type of thing you fix immediately not use as an election issue. I'm afraid it's too little too late Joe
-54If any issue is worth a single issue vote, it’s Supreme Court reform. (Arguably the only possible thing besides this is some form of proportional representation or other election reform, but that’s still not on the table at the moment.)
21