Ron Wyden introduces a bill that would radically reform the Supreme Court

A Democratic U.S. senator has introduced legislation that will radically reform the Supreme Court, proposing, among other things, increasing the number of judges to 15 members.

Sen. Ron Wyden (Oregon) introduced the bill on Wednesday. Given that the Senate is divided with a slim Democratic majority and the House of Representatives is currently controlled by a similarly narrow Republican majority, the bill is highly unlikely to be passed or even considered this term of Congress. Still, Wyden hopes that certain elements of the bill will be adopted in the future, with the goal of restoring public trust in the Court after a series of ethics scandals.

“I think we all agree that it’s time for Supreme Court reform. As of today, I have a law for that,” Wyden said in X.

The bill proposes increasing the number of judges at the Tribunal from nine to 15 over the next dozen or so years. At that time, presidents appointed judges on an ongoing basis, every first and third year of their terms. The bill would also prohibit the Senate from blocking the president’s nominations – after the Judiciary Committee selects a candidate, the Senate would be required to hold a full vote on the nomination within 180 days.

Supporters of court expansion note that it would be beneficial for a number of reasons — for example, it could reduce the politicization of the nomination process because a single candidate on a 15-member court would have less influence on final decisions than a candidate on the court would have on a nine-member court.

The bill would also impose new restrictions on the Supreme Court, including restrictions on how justices can rule on laws passed to ensure greater respect for judicial precedent. Justices could still rule on the constitutionality of federal actions and state cases with a simple majority. However, for legislation passed by Congress and signed by the president, a new “review” would be introduced, requiring two-thirds of the Supreme Court to declare the law unconstitutional for their verdict to stand.

Judges would also be subject to annual IRS audits that would be made public, and Supreme Court nominees would have to submit at least three years of their most recent records before the Senate would consider their confirmation. Under Wyden’s plan, judges could also be more easily removed from office – the bill would eliminate the current standard in which judges individually decide whether they should resign themselves and instead allow two-thirds of the Court to decide whether a judge should hear a case.

Discussing your plan with Washington Post.Wyden explained that his proposals were needed to increase confidence in the Supreme Court and reduce its politicization. Wyden said:

It is no secret that the process of selecting judges is politicized. We have this completely politicized process that has resulted in a Supreme Court that now often issues drastic rulings that overturn laws and overturn precedents. We propose a way to restore the balance between the three branches of government.

Polling actually shows that a majority of Americans have a low opinion of the Supreme Court. In a Marquette University Law School poll released last month, just 43 percent of respondents said they approved of the Court’s actions in recent years. Meanwhile, almost 6 out of 10 respondents (57%) said they did not accept the Supreme Court.

Much of the disdain for the current incarnation of the Court probably stems from the lack of an enforceable code of ethics. When asked about their opinion on the ethical standards of judges, the majority of respondents (36%) rated them “low” or “very low”. Another 34 percent described judges’ ethical standards as “average,” and only 27 percent described their standards as “high” or “very high.”