Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BWdem4life

(2,419 posts)
Thu May 2, 2024, 12:57 AM May 2024

Do you support expanding the Supreme Court?

SC term limit poll
107 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
No, leave the Court as is
10 (9%)
No, but term limits should be added
3 (3%)
Yes, make it 11 justices - lifetime appointment
1 (1%)
Yes, make it 11 justices and add a term limit
1 (1%)
Yes, make it 13 justices - lifetime appointment
7 (7%)
Yes, make it 13 justices and add a term limit
84 (79%)
Other
1 (1%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll
17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

calimary

(84,006 posts)
2. Don't forget the term limits!
Thu May 2, 2024, 02:03 AM
May 2024

This lifetime appointments shit has MORE than outlived its own usefulness.

Fla Dem

(25,597 posts)
4. I've believed we should expand the court for years.
Thu May 2, 2024, 10:20 AM
May 2024

The Federal appellate courts have been expanded over the years to handle the increase in cases. Supreme Court Justices should match the number of appellate court districts.

There are 13 appellate courts that sit below the U.S. Supreme Court, and they are called the U.S. Courts of Appeals. The 94 federal judicial districts are organized into 12 regional circuits, each of which has a court of appeals. The appellate court’s task is to determine whether or not the law was applied correctly in the trial court. Appeals courts consist of three judges and do not use a jury.
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure


Also, along with term limits should be an age limit. Retire at 30 years on the bench or at age 70.

LiberalFighter

(53,431 posts)
10. I agree about the 13.
Thu May 2, 2024, 01:53 PM
May 2024

It would be the easiest to enact. Would not require an Amendment. Your last two would.

Response to Fla Dem (Reply #4)

Wednesdays

(20,225 posts)
5. It ain't gonna happen in the near future
Thu May 2, 2024, 10:27 AM
May 2024

Biden doesn't want it. Schumer doesn't want it. Johnson definitely doesn't want it. And three-quarters of the states ain't gonna vote for it.

So it doesn't matter if I'm for it or against it.

Polybius

(17,326 posts)
14. If McConnell were in the minority in 2016, he'd be powerless
Thu May 2, 2024, 09:33 PM
May 2024

That's why the Senate is far more important than the House.

standingtall

(2,905 posts)
8. Should be made 15 Justices
Thu May 2, 2024, 12:13 PM
May 2024

Term limits may sound nice, but there is no chance that's ever going to happen, because the Supreme Court would have the final say and their not going to rule for their own mandatory retirement. As far as getting enough support for a Constitutional amendment that's never going to happen either.

LiberalFighter

(53,431 posts)
13. Increasing to 13 would not require an amendment.
Thu May 2, 2024, 02:04 PM
May 2024

Back during FDR there was an attempt to create legislation that would add a justice when one turned 70. Those are 70 or older would still stay on the court but all those that age or older would split a vote.

If it was in effect now, Thomas and Alito would each have one half vote. Sotomayor turns 70 later this year and Roberts in January.

haele

(13,382 posts)
16. 13 justices for 13 districts. Number of justices go up and down
Thu May 2, 2024, 10:16 PM
May 2024

As do the districts. If your district gets consolidated, then it's rock, paper, scissors as to decide who gets the remaining district.

Haele

Bettie

(16,862 posts)
17. Frankly, I think the court should be large enough to have at least two
Thu May 2, 2024, 10:21 PM
May 2024

panels running at any given time. When the number of justices was set, the population was about a third of what it is, less than that actually; let them hear more cases and have two randomly chosen panels available to hear them.

Also, it would make recusal much easier. Oh and an actual binding code of ethics including guidelines for recusal and rules for accepting gifts should be put in place as well.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Do you support expanding ...