Editorial: Saving the supremes: Packing the Supreme Court should be off the table, but (long) term limits may well make sense




  • In Business
  • 2021-12-21 09:00:00Z
  • By NY Daily News

In a 288-page report as long and detailed as any Supreme Court ruling, a 34-member, bipartisan presidential commission couldn't reach consensus on whether the nation's highest judicial panel should grow from nine, where it's been since 1869, to some larger number. It should've been easy, especially for a panel so large, to grasp: Of course having a president pack the court won't solve any of its underlying problems.

To the contrary, letting the chief executive enlarge the bench that issues the final word on constitutional law and statutory interpretation would snap the final, frayed thread of credibility by which the court now hangs, forcing presidents of each party to retaliate with new lifetime appointments of their own. No doubt, Republicans have been primarily responsible for politicizing the court - but a move by President Biden to add new liberals now would be like deploying a hydrogen bomb in a fission nuclear war.

Three decisions by presidents and Senate majority leaders have produced the court's current six-to-three conservative supermajority, one likely to overrule Roe v. Wade and embrace a radical interpretation of the Second Amendment that nullifies life-saving gun safety laws. Most devious was Mitch McConnell's 2016 refusal to give President Obama's moderate pick of Judge Merrick Garland a hearing after Antonin Scalia's death early that year. That was followed by the installation of Neil Gorsuch in the seat, capped off by the mad rush to approve President Trump's nominee, Amy Coney Barrett, following the late 2020 death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

It may pain Democrats to refuse to go deeper down the route of politicizing the court, but someone has to be the relative grownup if one of the nation's most important institutions has any hope of surviving a dangerously divisive moment. Generous term limits for justices would help balance the court ideologically rather than incentivizing the appointment of young zealots and leaving so much to when a lifetime appointee happens to die. Don't pack a court on the brink; find a way to bring it back.

___

COMMENTS

More Related News

Monkeypox? Climate? Deciding what
Monkeypox? Climate? Deciding what's a national emergency
  • World
  • 2022-08-13 13:11:39Z

In November 1979, a little over a week after student militants seized control of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and took 52 American citizens hostage, President ...

The Memo: What the latest dramatic twists mean in the Trump-FBI saga
The Memo: What the latest dramatic twists mean in the Trump-FBI saga
  • US
  • 2022-08-13 09:57:26Z

The 45th president of the United States is under investigation for potential violations of the Espionage Act. That one potent fact was the most explosive...

Economy: U.S. adds jobs despite recession fears
Economy: U.S. adds jobs despite recession fears

Is this a good time to change jobs?

With House Passage, the Inflation Reduction Act Is a Massive Win for the Climate and the U.S. Economy
With House Passage, the Inflation Reduction Act Is a Massive Win for the Climate and the U.S. Economy

August 12, 2022 /3BL Media/ - Ceres Director of Federal Policy Zach Friedman issued the following statement after the U.S. House of Representatives passed...

House Democrats pass sweeping healthcare, tax and climate bill
House Democrats pass sweeping healthcare, tax and climate bill

The Inflation Reduction Act to cap drugmakers' price hikes, tax wealthy corporations and reduce emissions by 2030 goes to Biden for his signature.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply

Comments

Top News: Business