Not happy with the rulings? Democrats want to change the Supreme Court
Ahead of the midterm elections, Democratic anger over the Supreme Court is escalating: increasing the number of justices, term limits, and a stricter code of ethics are already on the table. Republicans accuse them of trying to "intimidate the court."
Ahead of the midterm elections in the United States this November, it seems that the Democratic Party has decided to take the gloves off regarding the Supreme Court. According to a report in the "Washington Post," anger on the American left over the court's rightward tilt has led to a wave of bills intended to carry out a real revolution in the country's most important judicial institution.
Among the prominent proposals currently on the table: increasing the number of justices from nine to 13, abolishing lifetime appointments and limiting their tenure to 18 years, creating a strict and enforceable code of ethics, and imposing restrictions on the court's emergency ruling process, critically referred to as the "shadow docket."
Democratic frustration is fueled by a series of recent rulings. Although the court blocked several initiatives by President Donald Trump in the last session, it also granted significant victories to conservatives. Among other things, the justices narrowed the historic 1965 Voting Rights Act, eased campaign finance laws, and expanded presidential powers. For liberals, these rulings are proof that the justices are motivated by politics rather than pure legal interpretation.
"There is constant and growing disappointment with the court's horrific record," said Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who recently introduced the term limits bill.
In an interview with the "Washington Post," he clarified that although these laws have almost no chance of passing in the current Congress, the very act of introducing them is intended to send a message to the public that there is a mechanism to fix the situation. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries added in a similar vein that "all options are now on the table."
Conversely, the conservative camp dismisses the initiatives with disdain, claiming it is a pure attempt at political bullying. Mike Ferguso, former chief legal counsel to Republican Senator Mitch McConnell, argued that the only goal is to "intimidate the court" so that it changes its rulings. Tom Jipping, a senior fellow at a conservative organization, emphasized that Democrats "never explain where the court got the law wrong, but only complain about the result."
In practice, the chance that these proposals will become law is slim. Without a solid Democratic majority in Congress and the abolition of the "filibuster" mechanism in the Senate, this is mainly a statement of intent. However, when prominent figures like former Vice President Kamala Harris call to "re-examine" increasing the number of justices, it seems that public trust in the institution is eroding. Professor Daniel Epps of Washington University summarizes the danger: "This is the first time there is a court where ideology completely overlaps with party affiliation. If half the country sees the court as a political institution, they might just say, 'to hell with these people.'"
