WASHINGTON — Democrats are increasingly demanding up-to-date rules for the nation’s Supreme Court, and the 2024 presidential election reflects a stark division within the party over how Supreme Court justices should behave and whether they should remain on the bench for life.
The erasure of a nearly 50-year-old national abortion law, the giving of former presidents wide latitude to avoid criminal prosecution, and several ethics scandals have heightened these questions. Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump are giving voters very different answers.
Harris platform calls for “common sense” reforms that include term limits for judges and an enforceable code of ethics that mirrors the rules applicable to lower federal judges.
When President Joe Biden announced About a week after dropping out of his re-election bid, Harris released a statement emphasizing the need to “restore confidence” in the court.
“That’s why President Biden and I are calling on Congress to pass important reforms — from imposing term limits on active-duty judges to requiring judges to follow binding ethics rules just like any other federal judge. And finally, in our democracy, no one should be above the law. “So we must also ensure that no former president has immunity for crimes committed in the White House,” she said.
While the Harris campaign did not provide additional details on her platform, Harris supports such efforts. As a senator in 2019, Harris co-sponsored: Bill enforcing the Uniform Code of Ethics at every level of the federal judiciary, including the Supreme Court.
Trump’s position
Asked to comment on Trump’s position on enforceable ethics rules or term limits on the Supreme Court, Trump campaign senior adviser Brian Hughes responded: “President Trump has said that outside of issues of war and peace, the nomination of a Supreme Court justice is the most important decision he will make.” can be taken by the American president. As president, he appointed constitutional judges who interpret the law as written, and he will do so again when voters send him back to the White House.”
The former president made his opposition to the changes known on social media.
Nearly two weeks before Biden’s July speech to pin out his ideas for improving the courthouse, Trump he wrote in Truth Social that “Radical Left Democrats are desperately trying to ‘play judge’ by calling for an illegal and unconstitutional attack on our SACRED United States Supreme Court.”
“The reason these communists are so depressed is that their illegal witch hunts fail everywhere. Democrats are trying to interfere in the presidential election and destroy our justice system by attacking their political opponent, the ME and our honorable Supreme Court. We must fight for fair and independent courts and protect our country. MAGA2024!” – he continued, as he often does, randomly capitalizing words.
The Republican National Committee said in its statement platform that the party is unequivocally opposed to any changes in the number of Supreme Court judges.
“We will keep the Supreme Court as it was always intended to be, i.e. with 9 judges. We will not allow the Democratic Party to increase this number, as they would like, by 4, 6, 8, 10, or even 12 judges. We will block them at every step.”
On October 15, Trump appeared at the Economic Club in Chicago accuse Democrats about their desire to add as many as 25 up-to-date judges to the Supreme Court.
Harris’ position on the Supreme Court from the 2024 campaign does not include a plan to change the number of justices. According to her, Harris expressed openness to expanding the court during her 2020 presidential campaign Policy and other reports. Biden, meanwhile, remained opposed changes, including limits on the term of office of the judiciary.
Immunity ruling
When Trump was accused charged with federal fraud and obstruction offenses for attempting to rig the results of the 2020 presidential election escalation his complaint about presidential immunity went to the Supreme Court.
On July 1, the judges returned the score 6-3 opinion granting former presidents criminal immunity for “fundamental constitutional” duties and presumed immunity for actions on the “outer perimeter” of official duties, but none for unofficial, personal acts.
Two judges who joined the ruling conservative majority – Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh – were appointed by Trump. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, also appointed under Trump to the Oval Office, joined them in partially agreeing with them.
Trump’s case has been delayed through most of 2024 by a Supreme Court trial over his campaign for a second presidency. The delay ultimately closed the door to the trial ahead of the November election.
The high-profile case not only highlighted the fact that Trump was being tried by his own appointees, but also that two other judges had recently been exposed in ethics scandals involving Republican Party donors and appeared to support Trump’s false claims that won the 2020 presidential election.
In April 2023, ProPublica uncovered that Justice Clarence Thomas accepted luxury travel and other enormous gifts of tickets from Republican billionaire Harlan Crow, a donor.
In May this year, the New York Times. published photos of an inverted American flag flying outside Justice Samuel Alito’s home after a violent riot by Trump supporters at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The inverted flag, a general symbol of protest, was adopted by Trump supporters who believed the 2020 election was rigged.
All parties denied any wrongdoing, and Alito rejected withdraw from Trump’s 2020 election overturn case and the next one thing filed by the defendant on January 6.
A call for a up-to-date code of ethics
While the Thomas and Alito scandals have drawn most attention, court watchers say many of the judges’ actions raise ethical questions.
Gabe Roth, founder of the nonpartisan nonprofit Fix the Court, said that “no justice has ever behaved completely ethically.”
Roth cited transgressions committed by both conservative and liberal justices: socializing with litigants arguing before the court, using government resources to promote a personal book, and examples of judges who did not recuse themselves from cases in which they appeared to have a stake.
“It wasn’t on the scale of the cases ProPublica uncovered, but no justice system is completely clean when it comes to ethics, but that doesn’t mean they’re all corrupt or compromised in any way. “For me, it’s simply a fact that the entire institution needs to focus more on ethical leadership,” Roth said.
ProPublica published numerous stories from 2023 detailing gifts that Thomas never disclosed, as well as a luxury fishing trip that Alito went on with the Republican billionaire who was arguing in court.
The Supreme Court is currently policing itself code proceedings and maintains that judges already follow the rules applicable to lower federal judges.
Democrats in Congress have introduced several bills aimed at imposing ethics rules on judges and limiting lifetime appointments, including: 18 years elderly.
The bill is led by Democrat Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island passed Democratic-led Senate Judiciary Committee in July 2023.
The legislation was intended to impose an enforceable code of ethics, tighten gift denial and disclosure requirements, and establish a grievance process similar to that used in lower courts.
Some attempt during unanimous passage in the Senate in June, it was blocked by the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.
“Let’s be clear: This isn’t about making the court better, it’s about making it weaker,” Graham said on the court.
Roth said that regardless of who wins the presidency and which party gains control of the Senate, the long-running fight over changing ethics and term limits on the Supreme Court will continue — and that it should not be partisan.
“If done right, it doesn’t favor this or that party, or this or that ideology. “It’s a little weird that one side says they don’t love ethics these days,” Roth continued. “I don’t understand it.”
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.