On July 29, President Joe Biden called for major changes in the Supreme Court, the imposition of 18-year term limits and the creation of an enforceable code of conduct. If passed, this would be one of the most important and influential pieces of legislation of the Biden administration.
However, this proposal was named “dead on arrival” by House Speaker Mike Johnson. This is one of the worst acts of partisanship seen by the speaker and his party in recent history.
At its core, no one should disagree with the idea of a code of ethics. The Supreme Court justices are likely some of the most powerful people in the free world. Virtually without outside opposition, justices can make decisions that can only be overturned by another court decision.
Are these the people who should be taking bribes? Are these the people who should rule on cases where they have a direct bias toward a plaintiff or defendant? No matter what side of the aisle one stands on, these should be no-brainer questions.
As for term limits, the point is only made clearer. Over half of the Supreme Court is over 50 years old, and none are younger than 50. The United States consensus shows, by contrast, that just 34% of the country is over 50 years old.
In other words, 66% of the country has crucial decisions being made for them by people older than them.
The Supreme Court is currently at a near-record low in trust ratings. Seven in ten Americans believe that the court puts political ideology above impartiality. These much-needed reforms must be put in place to restore the public’s belief in the validity of one of its most powerful bodies of leadership.
Acknowledgment: The opinions expressed in this piece are those of the individual author.
Hi, Noah,
You did a great job explaining your argument on this topic, and I'm inclined to agree with you. When Supreme Court justices live life-time terms, it gives a singular president the power to control the law for years and years after their term is over. Term limits make complete sense in that regard.