An important effort led by @houseadmdems.bsky.social and Rep. Joe @morelle.house.gov to clean up Washington in all three branches of government -- including term limits for SCOTUS justices & ensuring the highest court in the land doesn't abide by the lowest ethical standards.
Enough is enough. We can get things back on track in a way that would give presidents an equal impact on the Court, while bringing new voices and viewpoints to the bench. How? With term limits & regularized appointments. Congress has the power to make this the law, and it should.
This year marks the 10th anniversary of Senator McConnell's decision to leave Justice Scalia's seat vacant for more than a year, waiting to fill it after the White House switched parties, only to reverse course and fill Justice Ginsburg's seat days before the 2020 election. 9/
As Americans we've grown accustomed to hyper-partisan confirmation fights over Supreme Court justices. For example... 8/
Fifty-seven constitutional scholars and retired federal and state judges have affirmed the constitutionality of term limits for Supreme Court justices. 7/
There's already a bill pending in Congress to address this issue. It's the TERM Act, led by Representative Hank Johnson (H.R. 3544). It takes this issue head-on. 6/
Justices timing their exits to happen under a particular president undermines trust in judicial impartiality.
The timing of a justice's retirement from the Supreme Court can affect the law and people's lives for decades. You can learn more here. 5/
To be clear, President Trump could be on his way to naming a fourth justice—maybe even a fifth or sixth.
President Biden had one.
President Obama had two—same as President George W. Bush.
President Carter? None.
Not all of these were due to retirements, but most were. 4/
The speculation about a potential SCOTUS retirement is on the table and really heating up, as the @nytimes.com reported over the weekend. 3/
Congress could end strategic, calculated retirements by establishing term limits for justices and limiting each president to two—and only two—SCOTUS appointments per term.
My colleagues @aliciabannon.bsky.social and @milov-cordobam.bsky.social discuss how it would work here. 2/
The season of frenzy about a new SCOTUS justice is starting.
If Justice Alito or anyone else retires, it means President Trump could appoint a fourth justice—well on his way to a SCOTUS majority.
It doesn’t have to be this way. This moment tells us the system needs reform. 1/
This is not a surprise.
Congress must address strategic SCOTUS retirements.
18-year term limits would ensure each president has two—and only two—SCOTUS picks per term.
That's how you prevent a president from stacking a majority of the Court for decades.
There continues to be a lot of scuttle about a potential retirement out of SCOTUS -- the @nytimes.com had a big piece over the weekend about Justice Alito. Will he or won't he? We just don't know.
In any event, here's why strategic retirements hurt SCOTUS.
“We’ve done it to ourselves,” Justice Sotomayor said during an appearance at the University of Alabama Law School. “The newspapers are filled with reports about how many emergency motions we are receiving. It’s unprecedented in the court’s history.”
When a president threatens to "nationalize" elections, we all have a role to play in ensuring the midterms are free and fair.
a gorgeous day on Capitol Hill
The Brennan Center’s Jesse Wegman explains why he’s starting a newsletter about the Supreme Court — what needs to change for the institution, why, and how to go about it. bit.ly/3NH1Vvs
Fifty-eight years ago tonight, the day before an assassin’s bullet ended his life, Rev. Martin Luther King,Jr. delivered this prophetic last speech.
3. Voting rights groups led by @lwvma.bsky.social (and represented by @aclu.org, @brennancenter.org, @legaldefensefund.bsky.social, @aaaj-aajc.bsky.social and @latinojustice.bsky.social) filed this lawsuit today (April 2):
www.courtlistener.com/docket/73133...
Historian @katemasur.bsky.social on the Trump admin's attacks on birthright citizenship:
"Efforts to undermine birthright citizenship" are "almost always highly political and driven by anti-immigrant sentiment, not by any legitimate understanding of the 14th Amendment."
(For more on Kate's work ⬇️)
Breaking: The president has signed an executive order on mail voting. He has no lawful authority to write the rules that govern our elections. He tried a year ago; we sued him; we won. A year later, he has tried again. He can expect the same result. 1/2
What does the public think about term limits for Supreme Court justices and other reforms? GW Professor Brandon L. Bartels digs into the polling data: bit.ly/4s9k6YO
Check out @jessewegman.bsky.social’s new newsletter on SCOTUS! Check out the below, and subscribe here: majorquestions.substack.com
The Trump administration's attacks on birthright citizenship are based on the same flawed thinking as the Supreme Court's infamous and long-ago-rejected opinion in Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857).
Historians @katemasur.bsky.social and @marthasjones.bsky.social explain:
“We must come to see that the end we seek is a society at peace with itself, a society that can live with its conscience.”—Rev. MLK Jr.
RIP Alex!
Close!
The @brennancenter.org got a shout out on tonight’s Jeopardy! Do you know the answer?
In the form of a question, of course…
Excited to share a new resource from the
@brennancenter.org called The Benchmark -- here you'll find analysis, commentary, and other relevant information about how SCOTUS is performing as an institution.
Analysis. Polling compendium. Shadow docket tracker. And lots more...
Check it out!
Check this out!
