Biden’s Supreme Court plan limits presidential immunity, adds 18-year court term, enforceable code
Make us a preferred source
Make us a preferred source on Google
The news: President Joe Biden called for sweeping changes to the US Supreme Court, including adding term limits for justices, an enforceable code of ethics, and a constitutional amendment to strip presidential immunity for crimes committed while in office.
In an opinion piece for The Washington Post, Biden said the Court was “mired in a crisis of ethics,” and criticised its decision to grant broad immunity to former presidents, labelling it dangerous and undermining public trust.
“I am calling for three bold reforms to restore trust and accountability to the court and our democracy,” he said.
The numbers: Biden proposed a system where the president appoints a justice every two years to spend 18 years on the Supreme Court. He argued the Court’s voluntary ethics code is weak and self-regulated, and that justices should be required to disclose gifts, avoid public political activities and recuse themselves from cases with conflicts of interest.
Amending the Constitution to limit the Court’s decision granting immunity to former presidents, which was made by a 6-to-3 conservative majority, requires a two-thirds vote in Congress. Alternatively, a convention can be called by two-thirds of state legislatures, followed by ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures, according to The New York Times.
The context: Biden’s initiative follows growing concerns over the Supreme Court's recent controversial decisions and ethics issues, but faces significant hurdles in a Republican-controlled House and a divided Senate.
The latest constitutional amendment, the 27th, was ratified in 1992, 203 years after its proposal. The 26th Amendment, which lowered the voting age to 18, was ratified just four months after being approved by Congress in March 1971.
What they said: Vice President Kamala Harris endorsed the reforms, saying “there is a clear crisis of confidence facing the Supreme Court as its fairness has been called into question after numerous ethics scandals and decision after decision overturning long-standing precedent.”
