Momentum for Court Reform Continues to Grow; Supreme Court Reform is No Longer an Afterthought or Fringe Issue

Press Release / October 03, 2024

TO: Interested Parties

FROM: Maggie Jo Buchanan, Managing Director, Demand Justice

RE: Momentum for Court Reform Continues to Grow; Supreme Court Reform is No Longer an Afterthought or Fringe Issue

DATE: October 3, 2024

As the American people brace for the United States Supreme Court’s coming term, the movement for Supreme Court reform is rapidly gaining momentum and support, despite repeated complaints by MAGA leaders in Congress who want a Supreme Court that is beholden to far-right interests for their own gain. 

With public trust in the Supreme Court at historic lows, responsible elected officials recognize the need for meaningful action. Reform of the federal judiciary has become a mainstream, bipartisan issue, with more than seventy percent of voters across the political spectrum agreeing that judges have too much power. At the end of July, President Biden announced his support for eighteen year term limits and a binding code of conduct for the justices on the Court–only the second time in American history a president has called for major reforms to the Court and for its justices. 

Vice President Harris and House Democratic Leader Jeffries also voiced support for the same term limits and ethics proposals. Senate Majority Leader Schumer has also urged reform, saying ​​“I feel very strongly for the sake of the republic we need reform in the courts” and introduced his own legislation earlier in the year to curb the practice of “judge shopping” in the lower courts in addition to the No Kings Act referenced below. 

Since President Biden’s announcement, we have seen continued efforts in Congress—spearheaded by senior Democrats—to hold the runaway, corrupt Supreme Court accountable to the people, as well as increasing numbers of lawmakers endorsing critical reforms. 

Legislative Momentum 

Over the past several months, Senate Democrats have pushed forward new bills,  including the introduction of legislation that would expand and reorganize the highest courts in the land as well as a legislative response to the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling.    

Notable examples of new pieces of legislation include:

  • Judicial Modernization and Transparency Act 
    • At the end of September, Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee Senator Wyden introduced a wide-ranging bill which includes reforms that would expand and reorganize the U.S. Courts of Appeals and Supreme Court, increase transparency in the Supreme Court recusal process, improve transparency around potential financial conflicts and other unethical behavior, and modernize the courts to ensure greater access to justice for more Americans. 
  • No Kings Act
    • In August, Leader Schumer, along with 34 Democratic Senators, introduced a measure designed to address the Supreme Court’s dangerous immunity ruling, Trump v. U.S., which infused American presidents with king-like powers. The measure asserts Congress’s authority to hold presidents accountable for crimes to the maximum extent allowed by the Constitution and limits the Supreme Court’s ability to intervene to protect a runaway executive.

Further, members of Congress supported and built momentum behind established court reform proposals such as:

  • TERM Act
    • Co-sponsors for the TERM Act grew significantly between the start of August recess and the end of the September work period. Introduced in the House by Rep. Hank Johnson, the bill would implement 18-year term limits for current and future justices. Overall, the bill gained 22 co-sponsors over this time period, increasing from 40 to 62. 
  • Judiciary Accountability Act of 2024
    • In September, Representatives Nadler, Johnson, Torres & Senators Hirono, Murkowski re-introduced bipartisan, bicameral legislation to extend anti-discrimination and harassment laws to 30,000+ judicial branch employees. Judicial branch employees are currently not protected by federal civil rights laws designed to prohibit harassment and retaliation. 
  • High Court Gift Ban Act
    • In October, Senators Luján (D-N.M.) and Welch (D-VT) introduced a companion bill to Representative Raskin’s and Ocasio-Cortez’s High Court Gift Ban Act. This bill would hold federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, to the same standards regarding gifts that currently apply to Members of Congress.

Congressional Oversight Efforts

Democratic leaders in Congress have also continued to draw on their oversight responsibilities and power to draw attention to the reckless actions of certain justices that demonstrate the need for reform. 

In addition to Sens. Whitehouse and Wyden’s request in early July that Attorney General Garland assign a Special Counsel to investigate the serious evidence of ethics and tax violations facing Justice Thomas, Sen. Wyden continued his investigation into the troubling financial dealings between GOP mega donor Harlan Crow and Thomas through the summer. Notably, in August, the New York Times reported that Wyden wrote a letter demanding more information on undisclosed trips Thomas took on Crow’s private jet between Hawaii and New Zealand.

Further, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on September 24th on the Supreme Court’s immunity decision, Trump v. US. The hearing highlighted the decision’s stunning lack of legal principles and the extreme ramifications of the decision. 

In particular, the hearing emphasized the harm to traditional checks and balances:

  • Panel Witness Mary B. McCord (Executive Director, Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, Georgetown University Law School) explained:
    • “Potential abuses of official power are alarming. Is Congress now barred from oversight requesting records or testimony from department leadership? What would stop a President from directing an investigation of their political enemies, journalists or activists even when there is no basis for doing so…This is what is left open by the decision as to what are the core constitutional powers which are absolutely immune.”
  • Panel Witness Philip Allen Lacovara (Former US Deputy Solicitor General & former Counsel to the Watergate Special Prosecutor) also noted the impact of the decision on the public’s trust in the Supreme Court itself:
    • “This decision reinforces the growing lack of confidence in the Court…the Court’s effectiveness depends on the public’s acceptance that the opinions are honest, honorable, well justified and persuasively explained. This decision fails those tests.”

Congress Checking The Court’s Extreme Decisions

Increasingly, Congress is also seeking to use its power to mitigate or fix the harmful impacts of the Court’s decisions and protect the well-being of the American people.  In addition to the No Kings Act, Congress has sought to fix the Court’s harmful and disastrous opinions in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System that made it more difficult for public servants to keep our communities healthy and safe. These bills include Senator Warren’s and Rep. Jayapal’s  Stop Corporate Capture Act and Senator Coons’s Agency Stability Restoration Act, both of which would address the conservative majority’s harms to our country and its laws and have strong support within the Democratic caucus. 

Public Trust in the US Supreme Court

These efforts are all occurring as public faith in the Supreme Court continues to be at historic lows. 

New polling, for example, from The Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) of the University of Pennsylvania found that trust of the Supreme Court is at its lowest overall since 2005, at 44%. 

This new research is well in line with other data on trust in the Supreme Court and support for reforms. Over the summer, Gallup reported that only 43 percent of Americans approve of the way the Supreme Court is handling its job–in September 2021, the Court’s approval rating hit an all time low of 40 percent and has not risen higher than 3 points since then. And earlier this year, polling conducted by YouGov on behalf of Demand Justice found that over 70 percent of Democrats, Republicans and Independents believe that “judges in our legal system have too much power to issue rulings that uphold, overturn, or alter our laws and regulations.”

Conclusion

Despite efforts by MAGA leaders to paint calls for reform as some type of political stunt, it is clear that the American people demand that Congress use its constitutionally mandated powers to check the rogue Supreme Court. And, as shown by the growing momentum illustrated above, it is clear that elected officials are increasingly understanding the importance and need for them to do just that.