Breaking News
Get Actionable Insights with InvestingPro+: Start 7 Day FREE Trial Register here
Investing Pro 0
Ad-Free Version. Upgrade your Investing.com experience. Save up to 40% More details

White House commission on Supreme Court reforms sees risks in expanding court

World Oct 15, 2021 12:50AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This article has already been saved in your Saved Items
 
© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: Storm clouds roll in over the U.S. Supreme Court, following an abortion ruling by the Texas legislature, in Washington, U.S., September 1, 2021. REUTERS/Tom Brenner/File Photo

By Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A White House commission studying potential changes to the U.S. Supreme Court said expanding the number of justices would pose "considerable" risks and might further politicize the court, according to preliminary draft documents released on Thursday.

Members of the commission formed by President Joe Biden appeared more positive about the benefits of imposing term limits and staggering appointments out over time. But they noted it might not be possible to make such a change without amending the U.S. Constitution.

The documents are to be used as a source of debate by members of the commission who are holding a meeting on Friday and will prepare a report for Biden and turn it over to him by mid-November.

Biden signed an executive order in April creating the 36-member bipartisan commission in response to calls from the left for seats to be added in order to counteract the 6-3 conservative majority on the nation's highest court.

Many Democrats were angered by Republican former President Donald Trump's success in filling three vacancies, including one that Republicans who controlled the Senate refused to fill when Democrat Barack Obama was president.

The commission noted that adding seats would clearly be lawful but said that "the risks of court expansion are considerable, including that it could undermine the very goal of some of its proponents of restoring the court's legitimacy."

It said that "rather than calm the controversy surrounding the Supreme Court, expansion could further degrade the confirmation process," adding that "a future Senate could respond by refusing to confirm any nominee."

PREFERENCE FOR TERM LIMITS

While the discussion materials noted that commissioners were divided on the merits and justification of expanding the court, they said that advocacy groups, a cross-ideological group of Supreme Court lawyers, academics and others preferred the idea of term limits for the justices, who currently have lifetime appointments.

"Among the proposals for reforming the Supreme Court, term limits for Supreme Court Justices appear to enjoy the most widespread and bipartisan support," one document said.

Term limits "would advance our constitution's commitments to checks and balances and popular sovereignty" by allowing each president to appoint two justices per four-year term. That "can enhance the court's legitimacy in the eyes of the public" because appointments will "appear fairer, less arbitrary and more predictable," the draft materials said.

But the question remains how term limits can be implemented as that might require an amendment to the Constitution. "Members of the commission are divided about whether Congress has the power under the Constitution to create the equivalent of term limits by statute," one document said.

It is significantly more difficult to amend the Constitution than it is for Congress to enact legislation.

The materials noted that the United States is "the only major constitutional democracy in the world that has neither a retirement age nor a fixed term of years for its high court justices."

White House commission on Supreme Court reforms sees risks in expanding court
 

Related Articles

Add a Comment

Comment Guidelines

We encourage you to use comments to engage with other users, share your perspective and ask questions of authors and each other. However, in order to maintain the high level of discourse we’ve all come to value and expect, please keep the following criteria in mind:  

  •            Enrich the conversation, don’t trash it.

  •           Stay focused and on track. Only post material that’s relevant to the topic being discussed. 

  •           Be respectful. Even negative opinions can be framed positively and diplomatically. Avoid profanity, slander or personal attacks directed at an author or another user. Racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination will not be tolerated.

  • Use standard writing style. Include punctuation and upper and lower cases. Comments that are written in all caps and contain excessive use of symbols will be removed.
  • NOTE: Spam and/or promotional messages and comments containing links will be removed. Phone numbers, email addresses, links to personal or business websites, Skype/Telegram/WhatsApp etc. addresses (including links to groups) will also be removed; self-promotional material or business-related solicitations or PR (ie, contact me for signals/advice etc.), and/or any other comment that contains personal contact specifcs or advertising will be removed as well. In addition, any of the above-mentioned violations may result in suspension of your account.
  • Doxxing. We do not allow any sharing of private or personal contact or other information about any individual or organization. This will result in immediate suspension of the commentor and his or her account.
  • Don’t monopolize the conversation. We appreciate passion and conviction, but we also strongly believe in giving everyone a chance to air their point of view. Therefore, in addition to civil interaction, we expect commenters to offer their opinions succinctly and thoughtfully, but not so repeatedly that others are annoyed or offended. If we receive complaints about individuals who take over a thread or forum, we reserve the right to ban them from the site, without recourse.
  • Only English comments will be allowed.

Perpetrators of spam or abuse will be deleted from the site and prohibited from future registration at Investing.com’s discretion.

Write your thoughts here
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
Post also to:
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Thanks for your comment. Please note that all comments are pending until approved by our moderators. It may therefore take some time before it appears on our website.
Comments (1)
Felipe Daniel
Felipe Daniel Oct 14, 2021 10:47AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Biden admin wants to pack the court with progressives turn US into Venezuela
Adrian White
Adrian White Oct 14, 2021 10:47AM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Sure, Felipe. That's why he put together a bipartisan commission rather than just going ahead and changing things, right?
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Add Chart to Comment
Confirm Block

Are you sure you want to block %USER_NAME%?

By doing so, you and %USER_NAME% will not be able to see any of each other's Investing.com's posts.

%USER_NAME% was successfully added to your Block List

Since you’ve just unblocked this person, you must wait 48 hours before renewing the block.

Report this comment

I feel that this comment is:

Comment flagged

Thank You!

Your report has been sent to our moderators for review
Continue with Google
or
Sign up with Email