Retired Federal Judge Nancy Gertner Believes Its Time For Supreme Court Reform

Should the Supreme Court Be Reformed?

A Look at the Arguments For and Against

What Is Supreme Court Reform?

The term "Supreme Court reform" encompasses a variety of proposals that aim to address perceived issues with the current structure and functioning of the U.S. Supreme Court. These proposals range from expanding the number of justices on the Court to enacting term limits to altering the process by which justices are appointed.

Why Reform the Supreme Court?

Proponents of Supreme Court reform argue that the current Court is too politicized and unrepresentative of the American people. They contend that the Court's recent decisions have been increasingly out of step with public opinion and that the lifetime appointments of justices have created a situation where justices are effectively immune from accountability to the public.

Arguments Against Reforming the Supreme Court

Opponents of Supreme Court reform argue that the Court's independence is essential to its ability to serve as a check on the other branches of government. They contend that altering the Court's structure or operation would undermine its legitimacy and compromise its ability to make impartial decisions.

What Are the Options?

There are a variety of Supreme Court reform proposals that have been put forward. Some of the most common include:

• Expanding the number of justices on the Court
• Enacting term limits for justices
• Altering the process by which justices are appointed
• Creating a nonpartisan commission to review the Court's decisions

What Are the Pros and Cons?

Each of these proposals has its own advantages and disadvantages. Expanding the number of justices would make the Court more representative of the American people, but it could also lead to a more polarized Court. Enacting term limits would ensure that justices are not serving on the Court for life, but it could also lead to a more rapid turnover of justices and a less experienced Court. Altering the process by which justices are appointed could make the Court more accountable to the public, but it could also lead to a more politicized Court. Creating a nonpartisan commission to review the Court's decisions would provide a way to evaluate the Court's decisions without altering its structure or operation, but it could also create a new layer of bureaucracy.

Conclusion

The debate over Supreme Court reform is complex and there are no easy answers. Ultimately, the decision of whether or not to reform the Court is a political one that will be up to the American people to decide.