Supreme Court nomination reforms

[American2020]

What would you propose to reform new supreme court judge's nomination ?

[brucejoel99]

REFORM OPTION #1. A constitutional amendment creating 18-year terms staggered every 2 years, so that each of the 9 Justices would be replaced in order of seniority every other year.

REFORM OPTION #2. Require the Senate to give judicial nominees a hearing & an up or down vote
 
REFORM OPTION #3. Appoint judges by executive decree

[MarkD]

Instead of indicating their assessment of a Supreme Court nominee after the President chose who to nominate, the ABA should first submit a list of who deserves to be nominated, and the President must choose from that list. We would need to amend the Constitution for this reform.

[Dereich]

Instead of indicating their assessment of a Supreme Court nominee after the President chose who to nominate, the ABA should first submit a list of who deserves to be nominated, and the President must choose from that list. We would need to amend the Constitution for this reform.

With this you would instantly politicize the ABA. Elections to the ABA Board of Governors and the House of Delegates would be fought on "what kind of judges should we force the President to choose for the Supreme Court." The power of the Court is too great and the fight for any political advantage too cutthroat for the ABA to remain non-partisan if you give them a huge amount of government power.

Plus, in my eyes, removing power from the popularly elected president in favor of a bunch of unrepresentative lawyers (elected only by other lawyers) would be an unacceptable erosion of democracy.

[OSR stands with Israel]

It would be this


1. Limit being on the Supreme Court to two 15 year terms on the bench

2.  Change the senate role from having a majority required to confirm a justice , to majority required to deny. If senate hasnt denied the appointee within 90 days of his appointment, that judge will be seated.

[mencken]

Ideally Kennedy's seat would go unfilled, leaving four left-leaning judges and four right-leaning judges, meaning that any decision that is not deadlocked would have to win over someone from the other side, else the lower court decision stands. However, given judicial drift this would likely become a 5-3 split in practice. Perhaps shortening the terms for sixteen years would mitigate this phenomenon. Some geographic diversity (why are six of of nine judges from the Northeast?) would also be helpful, although I am not sure how to implement that in practice.


Just as a counterfactual, if this were implemented sixteen years ago, the makeup of the court would be something like this:

• Rehnquist replaced by center-right replacement in 2001, soon to be replaced by right replacement in 2017
• Stevens replaced by right replacement in 2003, soon to be replaced by right or center-right replacement in 2019
• O'Connor and Scalia replaced by one right replacement in 2005
• Kennedy replaced by center-right replacement in 2007
• Souter replaced by left replacement in 2009
• Thomas replaced by center-left replacement in 2011
• Ginsberg replaced by center-left replacement in 2013
• Breyer replaced by center-left replacement in 2015

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Increase the size of the Court to 11 by adding an additional seat to be nominated in 2021, and the second to be added in 2025 (and if we get a 12th numbered circuit a third additional seat to be added in 2029.)

More generally, if the Senate refuses to vote up or down within 100 days of receiving a nomination, the President can make an interim appointment even if the Senate is not in recess.

Make explicit the ability of the Court to overturn legislation, but require a three-fifths supermajority to do so.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I'd support establishment of judicial term without the possibility of renomination, thus preserving the justice's independence while ensuring some healthy change. A term of 10/15 years.

I'd oppose establishing a mandatory retirement age, because it would only result in Presidents nominating as young candidates as possible only to have them serve longer.

[BuckeyeNut]

I was at a Judiciary Subcommittee hearing in 2015 where Cruz proposed 18-year limits. I think it's honestly not terrible. Though, I think justices should have the opportunity to be confirmed again.

EDIT: I sort of like a geographic diversity requirement. Maybe 4 justices appointed by geography would be an okay addition? Also with limits, of course.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I was at a Judiciary Subcommittee hearing in 2015 where Cruz proposed 18-year limits. I think it's honestly not terrible. Though, I think justices should have the opportunity to be confirmed again.

I disagree. A desire to be reappointed would put a heavy bias on their work.

[KingSweden]

Each judge serves 18 years with a new judge appointed every 2 years after a retirement

would also allow Congress to overturn a decision with 2/3rds vote in Congress

These are both outstanding ideas.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I was at a Judiciary Subcommittee hearing in 2015 where Cruz proposed 18-year limits. I think it's honestly not terrible. Though, I think justices should have the opportunity to be confirmed again.

I disagree. A desire to be reappointed would put a heavy bias on their work.

Yes. There is no way to do term limits without creating some kind of bias. If you make it non-renewable, then they will try to play favorites to obtain another office or win an election.

These are problems that occur already, but adding an institutional incentive for them to occur would increase the consequences and frequency of such biased and unequal justice.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

- Reinstate 60 vote rule
- If the nominee is not the subject of a cloture vote within 125 days of being nominated, and has not been formally voted down in committee, they are assumed to be confirmed by inaction and will immediately begin serving on the court.
- Change senate rules so that the judicary committee is equally​ divided between both parties.
- Congress can override any decision with a 7/10 majority vote and the president's signature - veto override requires a 4/5 majority vote.
- Require a 6-3 majority to overturn legislation
- Each judge stands for a nationwide retention vote every 12 years (the 1st one occuring in their 12th year in office) and must earn 40%+1 vote support to remain in office.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The result of a center right Crt by a twice elected Trump or Pence will only sede power back to the states for the next 10-15 years or so.  Then, the left will be looking to replace Clarance Thomas, by then. Abortion and SSM will allow states like CA, IL, HI and NY, solid Democratic states the right to make their own rules on this issue.

All that won't be revised is the right to bear arms, and the right to gun ownership.  This, by a center-right candidate replacing Ginnsberg in 2018.

But, hopefully, she won't leave the bench until after 2020 election.

[politicallefty]

I agree with the 18-year term limit idea so long as we have nine Justices. If we go to 11, then it'd a 22-year term. In other words, excepting deaths/resignations/retirements/impeachments, a new Justice takes office every two years.

I would change the nomination process itself. It should no longer be with the President himself/herself. Instead, I think we should create a panel consisting of the President, the Speaker of the House, the Majority Leader of the Senate, and the Minority Leaders of both Houses. In order for a nomination to proceed, all five would have to agree. At that point, the Senate would consider the nomination and vote to confirm only upon a 2/3 majority.

I'm willing to consider something else, but the polarization at the Supreme Court unnerves me. Half the country should not be scared to death as a result of a Supreme Court nomination. I think a consensus in the nominating process could somewhat help to ease tensions and help establish more of a consensus.

[Del Tachi]

Instead having to win 51 votes in the full Senate, SCOTUS nominations should have to be confirmed by a smaller committee of Senators which consists of an equal number of Republicans and Democrats.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

(This is kind of based on some European countries manchanism to elect non-exective Head of States and the like.)


Remove power to nominate and select SCOTUS members from POTUS. Have them elected in a secret ballot by a full sitting of Congress three at a time via Single Transferable vote for 12 year terms. The STV is to endure the bench are always represenative of the full idealogical diversity of the present. The secret ballot is to remove the unseemly  partisan hysterics around the topic.

So at the beginning of 2016, each member pf Congress would rank his or her choices of qualified applicants; and the selected three (which would presumebly be of the liberal, right and centre wings) would have 12 year terms. Four years later, new congress (I also oppose two year terms) would elect another three; four years later another new congress and anither slate elected.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

With Thomas and Roberts replacing swing vote Kennedy on immigration and gerrrymandering, Dems will have to look at reforms so that they can have a liberal justice in time for Ginsberg, Breyer and Thomas vacany.  15 year terms and majority to deny should be the rule. Overturn a decision also should be a rule change.

[Cynthia]

- Reinstate 60 vote rule
- If the nominee is not the subject of a cloture vote within 125 days of being nominated, and has not been formally voted down in committee, they are assumed to be confirmed by inaction and will immediately begin serving on the court.
- Change senate rules so that the judicary committee is equally​ divided between both parties.
- Congress can override any decision with a 7/10 majority vote and the president's signature - veto override requires a 4/5 majority vote.
- Require a 6-3 majority to overturn legislation
- Each judge stands for a nationwide retention vote every 12 years (the 1st one occuring in their 12th year in office) and must earn 40%+1 vote support to remain in office.

This sounds nice, except the last two

[Dr. MB]

Election for a single 10 year term. There would be an election every 2 years (with 1 or 2 justices depending on the election). Justices cannot run for reelection.