A lot of filler in that article to get to:
- Expand the Court to 13 Justices
- Impose Term Limits
- Create a Balanced Bench (which would expand the Court to 15 justices, kinda negating the first reform idea)
Please can we stop trying to make this genocide loving neo-liberal piece of pig shit a 2028 candidate?
He’s not doing anything special that any progressive anti-Israel candidate isn’t doing better.
Removed by mod
He’s smarmy. He got elected mayor of the fourth largest city in Indiana and then said, “you know what? I’m ready to be the fucking president!” I believe he is a megalomaniac.
Just make it a felony to accept a gift from anyone. And enforce it. Like go to their house with an arrest warrant enforce it
Make it a felony to give a gift to any Justice. High ranking officials get way too many passes.
They will never learn that reform is a failed path to progress. No matter what changes they claim to support and try to implement, those changes will always still favor the wealthy over the working class.
Yeah, better to do nothing and just let things rot even further. Thanks for your attention to this matter.
Supporting the oligarchy is supporting what caused the rot.
My idea of adequate reform is no more oligarchy. That’s where the rot is coming from.
This balanced bench thing is a horrible idea. Because if one party gets to have a run where voters trust their candidate to be President for four or five terms in a row, then why should the party that lost those election retain control over any seats?
Straight term limits are a better idea. If each President was guaranteed to be able to appoint a few justices during their 4-year term, it would minimize the impact of additional appointments. (It would also reduce the number of justices who have to be replaced because they die while serving).
If the Presidency continues to ping-pong between the parties every term or two, then the balance would come naturally. But if voters favor one side for a stretch eventually the court would come around to reflect that…
… And the idea that the sitting justices would appoint more is a non-starter too. It would just serve to further enhance partisan control, because the party with partisan advantage would get to appoint more partisans.
On the other hand, why should a party that wins a few elections when seats are open 40 years ago retain any sort of control? I know you said term limits and I agree, but even if the presidency changed hands every single time it’s possible to pack the bench by a) withholding appointments, b) by timing your stepdown, or c) appointing younger, less qualified justices to the bench for the express purpose of serving a long tenure.
I like the idea of term limits and also mandatory financial audits of justices and immediate family that result in felony charges for financial crimes or failures to report.
