Americans no longer have faith in the US supreme court. That has justices worried

[turbinetree]

Russ Feingold

Our highest court is facing a legitimacy crisis and is in desperate need of reform. And yet, due to the deadlock that seems to be Congress these days, I too often hear the rebuke to US supreme court reform, “None of these reforms will happen, so what is the point of talking about them?”

This defeatist argument fails to recognize a pivotal audience who surely hears the growing public calls for urgent reform – the supreme court itself.

We need only look to the number of justices who have felt the need recently to speak up on behalf of the court, in an attempt to justify its egregious abuse of judicial norms and processes, to know the justices are listening.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/21/americans-no-longer-have-faith-in-the-us-supreme-court-that-has-justices-worried

-snip-

The justices, through their own actions and words, have demonstrated their vulnerability to public pressure in support of court reform. Turns out, justices do not like being told they have no clothes on.

As the court delves into its new term, it should have no doubt that all eyes will be upon it. If they want to escape it, rather than hoping the press will be cowed into submission, the justices of the court might consider fulfilling the mission of the institution they embody, by upholding constitutional rights and respecting judicial norms.

[SWBTATTReg]

1. Maybe they should have thought about some of their rulings first long and hard, before they

tainted the waters w/ their one-sided judgments, their late night doings, etc.? They have only themselves to blame and what they have done is tainted the respect of this institution, making it less likely that anyone is going to pay attention anymore to the Supreme Court. A joke, by the way.

[Comfortably_Numb]

19. I'll start checking my roof for pig shit.

[lindysalsagal]

55. lol

[joetheman]

56. Yeah. just imagine when citizens begin to ignore the SCOTUS like GOP-Trumpers ignore Congress. nt

[abqtommy]

2. I'll be getting my flying pony before...

..."the justices of the court might consider fulfilling the mission of the institution they embody, by upholding constitutional rights and respecting judicial norms."

[msfiddlestix]

11. Same here...

I'm a big fan of Russ Feingold.... I love that he is speaking up on this situation, and if he wants to inspire optimism that's fine with me.

Unfortunately, I think we are seeing a complete demolition (in real time) of the little credibility SCOTUS might have "enjoyed" thus far.

What we worried about for decades has become a stark reality. And there's eff all we can do about it.

Same with everything else considered a pillar of democracy, collapsing before our eyes.

[lagomorph777]

3. If they don't want to be accused of extremist partisan judicial activism,

...they could maybe stop behaving as extremist partisan judicial activists.

We need to add 4 Justices and at least stanch the bleeding.

[Tetrachloride]

5. Agree 4++;

[BlueTsunami2018]

29. And how is that even possible?

We can’t get a damned infrastructure bill passed.

[lagomorph777]

30. Sigh. I know. We have a 2-person problem to solve, then we can deal with those 9.

[DENVERPOPS]

42. Agree to adding four

that aren't hand picked and appointed by Mitch..........

[bluestarone]

4. What the SC NEEDS to realize is

If TFG ( or one like him) EVER wins again, there will never be a SC for the people of this GREAT COUNTRY>

[Butterflylady]

6. Absolutely, they have done this to themselves.

Why even take a case to this court when you already know the outcome. However, if it is a republican cause, have the champagne on hand.

[JanMichael]

7. They all probably read Grisham's "the pelican brief". NT

[Ziggysmom]

8. I wish Russ Feingold was still our Wisconsin Senator.

Instead we have Ron Johnson; the puke that said he wasn't afraid of tRumps January 6th terrorists because they love this country.

[DFW]

16. So do I!!!!

I had the chance to talk to him for a little over half an hour during the summer of 2016, and thought, how could Wisconsin NOT send this man back to the Senate? We found out, didn't we?

[Kid Berwyn]

26. If not there, then the Supreme Court.

Russ Feingold has integrity.

[mountain grammy]

32. Agree!

He is such a good man.. Like when Colorado lost Udall to that puke Cory Gardner. At least we came to our senses and voted that asshole out.

[Omnipresent]

9. Justices care about polls now?

[lagomorph777]

10. They care because public outrage may force reforms,

which could reduce their power and therefore the ability to demand bribes.

[totodeinhere]

37. I doubt it. The Senate GOP plus Manchin and Sinema will block any reform. n/t

[Omnipresent]

41. They're taking bribes?

I thought the worst they were, were political operatives.

[LT Barclay]

50. From what I have read they are allowed to go to judicial "retreats" where they are

Wined and dined and crammed full of perverted logic to support a fascist agenda. Or in the case of Clarence Thomas they just pass the cash through his wife.

[WHITT]

12. If They Use The Missouri Case

to de facto overturn Roe, Biden should hold a presser at say 4:30PM, and introduce four new judges, not to nominate them, but state as of 5PM, they are APPOINTED to the SCOTUS.

[NurseJackie]

13. We need 13 USSC Justices. (All appointed by Biden or Harris)

[ancianita]

17. Yes.

No one in government can stop Congress from reforming the Judiciary. Perhaps after we retain the House and gain past a tie in the Senate in 2022...

[totodeinhere]

39. I hope so but a lot of Democrats are privately very worried about the 2022 midterms.

It Looks Like House Democrats Are Worried About The 2022 Midterms

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/it-looks-like-house-democrats-are-worried-about-the-2022-midterms/

[MarcA]

14. Unelected Job for Life. Should have been corrected long ago.

But many people only care if and when the USSC, and other Fed Courts, support or oppose what they believe in.

[LogicFirst]

15. Time to face reality.

Whether something is constitutional is all a matter of opinion, and right now we have 6 Republican opinions. I'll be surprised if they don't do away with Miranda.

[kacekwl]

18. I'm sure they

aren't losing much sleep.

[monkeyman1]

20. non - political my ass ! damn joke !

[BlueIdaho]

21. The Roberts Kangaroo Court

Has brought shame on itself. If they are looking for a reason why Americans no longer trust the Supreme Court they only need look in the mirror.

[70sEraVet]

22. John Roberts had the opportunity to speak up in protest when the last two were muscled in

He stood by idly while a rabid political party made a mockery of the selection process, and turned his court into an arm of that party.
I really think he could have made McConnell back off.

[Uncle Joe]

23. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread turbintree.

[Johnny2X2X]

24. Bull shit

They couldn’t care less. They have lifetime appointments l, they care zero what the public thinks of them.

[Evolve Dammit]

25. I haven't since 2000. And Clarence Thomas? Anita Hill nailed his disgusting ass.

[calimary]

27. Gee, ya THINK?

[Joinfortmill]

28. Two Justices need to go for lying to Congress during their confirmation: Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett

[lindysalsagal]

57. +1000.

Thank you. The gqp has no regard for humans: They're all fundies and just want to go to their imaginary heaven. Humans are irrelevant. Hence, covid denial.

[hotrod0808]

31. Where has everybody else been?

For the bulk of my adult life, The Supreme Court has lacked integrity or credibility. There's Bush v Gore, John Roberts as Chief Justice, Citizens United, Merrick Garland's denial of a hearing, and now these last four years of garbage.

[bucolic_frolic]

33. It's not just SCOTUS. It's disparities in sentencing & justice nationwide

When did this system go haywire? Seems 35 years ago it was below the radar. Maybe it's just the univeral real time communication - internet, Facebook, Twitter, email, kik. Info is now comparable to other info.

I'm no fan of Roberts, but it seems like past Chief Justices didn't have a judicial bureaucracy to manage. No one outside the legal profession talked a lot about the law. Not that he's done much to reign in wayward rulings. But what could he do anyway?

[LiberalFighter]

34. They should retire

[DoBotherMe]

35. If they get rid of the sex offenders

maybe their reputation would improve.

[totodeinhere]

36. The headline says that this has the justices worried.

But I doubt if at least five of those conservative justices are worried one bit. They know there is no way to dislodge them from the bench so why worry? Just keep om destroying this country with no consequences. We could never get 67 Senate votes to remove them.

[RainCaster]

38. Good fuckin luck with that

The SCOTUS is as corrupt as the GOP. I have lost all faith in that institution.

[geretogo]

40. If you look at the history of this country very little change for the better has come through the

ballot box . Major change has come about because of violence in the streets . Watts riots , union protesters being shot in the 30's ,
protesters being beaten to end the Viet Nam war to name a few . Don't look for any democracy going through the Senate .
I'm waiting for things to get so bad the people will up rise as they did in the Watts riots . The Supreme Court will bend to the rioters .

[Ligyron]

59. Action in the streets is rife with possibilities.

It definitely had a lot to do with ending the war in Vietnam and I was a proud participant in that effort.

But even though there were large scale demonstrations against the re-invasion of Iraq, they accomplished little. Bush and the MIC still fed at that trough for decades.

We just had some serious action recently in D.C. but the result wasn’t exactly what the participants were hoping for.

That said, I for one would gladly stand shoulder to shoulder with any like minded individuals who would care to participate in some well thought out “good trouble”. The more the merrier.

[Quanto Magnus]

43. whatever....

Damn skippy we don't have faith in the courts....

They're just going to blather on about it, but DO nothing.

[aggiesal]

44. The (D) Presidential Candidate has won the popular vote in 7 of last 8 Presidential elections ...

yet (D) Presidents have only seated 4 of the last 9 justices.
2 each by Clinton & Obama.

Going back to Nixon, (D) Presidents have only seated 4 of the last 18 justices.
2 each by Clinton & Obama. Carter never made an appointment to SCOTUS.

My suggestion to fix SCOTUS is the following.
1) Increase number from 9 to 13 (6 Liberal, 6 Conservative, 1 Chief Justice)
2) Each case will only use 9 randomly selected justices with provisions from section 3) below.
This is done at the Appellate level, I'm sure at other levels as well, so why not
the Supreme Court?
3) The majority will be based on the WH Administration
Liberal administration (i.e. Democratic) has a 5-4 Liberal leaning majority
Conservative administration (i.e. Republican) has a 5-4 Conservative leaning majority
This way, the administration that gets voted into the WH, will determine the
balance of the court for the period in office.
4) This brings up the issue if a Supreme Court Justice dies/retires with leaning opinions
opposite the current administration. For example, if Justice Thomas retires, Biden would
then have to nominate a conservative justice. But Biden doesn't have to nominate a conservative
justice so far right as Thomas. Biden would nominate a conservative justice closer to the
middle of the spectrum. Same could have happened with Pendejo45. Replacing RBG with
another Liberal, but someone closer to the middle than RBG.
This would have eliminated the leanings of Amy Comey Barrett.

This removes the ability of the court to lean in any direction for 10-20 years,
like we have right now, unless we vote for administrations that lean in the same
direction for all those years.

So, YES! We should increase the court to 13, but only 9 judges would sit and hear the case.
Leaning in whatever the direction the White House wants.

To the victor goes the spoils.

[RicROC]

48. great ideas!

I might suggest:

1) expand the SCOTUS to 19 to diminish the influence of any one Justice.

2) Justices who are lawyers to be considered for appointment to SCOTUS MUST have a positive rating by the Lawyers Assoc (whatever the proper name of it is). And/or must be on a list of recommended Justices by that legal entity.

3) Increase the # of Judicial circuits to 19.

4) Term limits. I would even think about the length of terms to be 18 years such that at the end of EVERY SESSION a Justice retires and new Justice is appointed for the next session.

[aggiesal]

49. I sent what I wrote to @POTUS on twitter ...

Biden has a commission looking into SCOTUS Reform, so I wonder if this may be an option already.

You suggested increasing from 9 to 19. Why 19?
How did you come up with this number?
I like your #2. The American Bar Association is the organization that quantifies justices.
Although (R)'s are trying to discount ABA rankings.

Implementing my suggestion doesn't necessarily removed term limits.
I've never been in favor of term limits at any level, anyway.
If I have a representative or a Senator that is very good at their job, why do I want to term them out?
I understand it can go against me as well, especially in Red regions/states.
Imagine if Pelosi had been termed out.
We have term limits here in California.

[ZonkerHarris]

45. The Roberts Court is showing it's true fascistic and anti-Democratic tendencies now.

[samsingh]

46. i feel that the US supreme court is a corrupt institution. I have more faith in the Supreme Court in

Brazil or Pakistan that the banana republic that is represented by the supreme court. I feel they are corrupt, anti-american, cheats living off the taxpayer and unfortunately other corporate sponsors and lobbies.

[Tommymac]

47. I'd pay more head to this if some other source then The Guardian was concerned.

The Right Wing Justices know exactly what they are doing and I find it hard to believe they have the slightest remorse.

If the Authoritarians win then they will rewrite history to make the SC look like innocent angels.

If Democracy wins, their legacy will be shit.

I think I know which side their self interest probably lies, Guardian or not.

[heckles65]

51. The Supreme Court is supposed to be the nine best legal minds actively discussing issues of the day

vis-a-vis Constitutional law. What we have now is a nine person legislature, little or no interaction, with at least four beholden to the Federalist society fantasy that the Constitution was near-perfect, the Founding Fathers anticipated every difficulty and technical development,

and if we find out that they didn't, well you can always amend the Constitution nah nah.

[jcgoldie]

52. Only way it could be worse is if one side ignored the process and loaded it with wingnut hacks...

...oh wait

[Mad_Machine76]

54. I thought that that last part said "devolves" instead of delves

but I guess that there's no real difference in this matter.

[Grins]

58. ...and thank you Sen. Susan Collins!

“…this conservative supermajority has made clear that precedent be damned.”

This is on you, Senator. (Not just you, but you’ll do for the moment as the most vocal about precedent.)

[moondust]

60. No amount of lipstick

smeared on by Sammy or the Handmaid is gonna hide what everybody can see by their actions.

[Karma13612]

61. As Senator Whitehouse

Has so eloquently pointed out on several occasions, the SCOTUS has some explaining to do.

I’ve no doubt at least Roberts is a tad worried. Not so sure about the likes of Acutely Conservative Barrett.

[SouthernDem4ever]

62. The fact that 3 of the justices were placed by the worst lying grifter on the planet

is reason enough to question their veracity.