In US history.
At least two lame duck Scotus ram throughs

about something that was known a year ago in some circles.

Great timing.

The Supreme Court has turned into an unelected politiburo in this country. The right will do anything to keep it. If Dems win in 2028 they will use the court to overturn anything.

I’m totally on board with an age limit. 70 would be perfect, but I’d be on board with 75. I could go along with grandfathering current justice.

As far as I'm concerned the more the merrier
I'd like to see 50. One for each state

I don't call expanding the court to actually represent all the regions in the country, one-on-one, packing the court. It's modernizing the court to ensure that each district has fair representation. It's not right that some regions are overseen by a single SC judge, while another SC judge has 3 or more jurisdictions to oversee. That's not equal representation in this country, IMO.

Even after expanding the court proportionally, I actually like the idea of rotating cases. Spin that wheel! (LOL) Seriously, I like the sound of the idea that court cases are not "assigned" to a single, singular judge. Rather, they are given to a judge randomly, for all intents and purposes. I like the idea, at least, if it's done legitimately. I believe Florida already has something like this in action, but you'll never convince me it was accomplished fairly when "Loose Cannon" kept getting all of Trump's cases!

And, even tho I'm 70, I'd like to see a retirement age for the judges. Back in the days of the Founders, this wasn't such a big deal. People often died before they lost their reasoning ability. With new meds and research, people are living longer these days. And it's just a fact that those with the most money will ensure the longest lifespan for themselves. But even that doesn't ensure good functioning, reasoning power... as we can see, especially, in Alito. When you have to go back to a 14th century monk just to validate a law depriving 50% of the population of their bodily autonomy... there is definitely something "not right" with your brain. Even rich people fall prey to dementia; and they make just as big fools of themselves as anyone else. It's just that their foolishness hurts the entire country. Therefore, special rules should be made for them, IMO.

term limits also. (Except for Ruth Bader Ginsberg)

That's the reason packing/expanding will not work.

speaking against the ugly bill and getting corporate money out of politics? Imagine if half the Dem senators did the same?

Divide and fan out across the states.

My first thought is it’s a bad idea.

Rarely does adding people to a committee (and I view SCOTUS as a type of committee) increase the quality the committee’s output.

Admittedly, Ive not thought this through. I’m open to influence.

If fact, some are codified in law or regulations.

Using ethics laws to go after a pol who has stayed in office after heir their faculties have declined is an interesting idea. I kind of like it. I think a valid argument could be made that Mitch McConnell has acted unethically (politics aside) by staying in office well past his physical and (most likely) mental ability to do so effectively. It shows an unethical disregard to his constituents. Other recent examples: Strom Thurmond was 100. Chuck Grassley is in his 90s, and House member Hal Rogers is 88.

Trump is turning is turning 80 in two weeks. Too old.

He’s basically a reincarnation of Tim Conway’s character from the Carol Burnett show classics. Every time he falls or freezes the internet goes wild with calls for “term limits” which is exactly what Republicans want because they know it will give them yet another advantage to bypass the democratic process by eliminating their opponents and weakening opponents’ effectiveness since limiting terms would also limit their ability to gain knowledge and experience.

There will be at least one vacancy announced by Thanksgiving, and rammed through by Christmas.

something that doesn't get nearly enough attention. It is going to be extremely difficult for this country to recover from that.

This summary is AI-generated. AI can make mistakes and this summary is not a replacement for reading the comments.

The comments reflect a deep dissatisfaction with the current state of the U.S. judiciary, particularly under President Trump. Many commenters express concern over the perceived prioritization of loyalty and political ambition over merit and legal reasoning in judicial appointments. There is significant criticism of specific judges and justices, with some commenters advocating for reforms such as term limits and a code of ethics. The overall sentiment is one of frustration and concern for the future of American democracy and the judiciary's role within it."

Vote, vote, vote…. ALL BLUE…. Everyone….

take the house and Senate back and then we/they control who gets on the SC. Not up to the standards? Then the candidate fails to get out of committee.

Hold them accountable. If they lie during their confirmation hearing? The get impeached.

I hope Schumer and others are carefully looking for any ways the minority can slow things down thru procedural devices. There is really not much time between the election and the end of the session given Thanksgiving and Christmas breaks.

I can remember that with ACA, the Republicans forced every maximum weighting period between votes that knew had 60 votes making passage happen the day before Christmas.

What's to stop him? The Senate? PLEASE! These toadies will confirm any number of his cronies and John Roberts will seat them. Never mind that 9 is the number of justices proscribed in the law... they'll expand the court to 11, 12, 13 and dare the new Senate to impeach them to bring it back down.

Call it just another of those "norms" he's breaking - and they'll brag about it.

Aileen Cannon still in the running?

HEADS UP: The 11th Circuit has ordered Briefs in Judge Cannon's Volume II Case

Trump's Past Is Catching Up With Him
Joyce Vance
May 30, 2026
We’ve discussed Trump’s ongoing efforts to prevent the release of former Special Counsel Jack Smith’s report on the now-dismissed classified documents prosecution against the president. That issue has now resurfaced. As we discussed at the time, Judge Aileen Cannon, who was appointed by Trump and has always ruled in his favor, was never going to order the release of Volume II of the Special Counsel Report, which covers the classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago. But now the matter is in the hands of a different court, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which has not hesitated to correct Cannon’s errors in the past.

There is a fascinating resonance between Cannon’s decision to prevent the release of Volume II and the issue we’ve seen surface in Trump v. IRS, the case whose “settlement” led to the creation of the slush fund Trump can use to give taxpayer dollars to January 6 defendants while erasing his and his family’s liability for debts owed to the government, like back taxes from tax audits. The common thread is cases where, instead of a legitimate adversarial process, with opponents duking it out in court, Trump is the actual party in interest on “both sides of the v.” In both of these situations, it’s Trump v. Trump, which leaves the president to decide what positions government agencies will take in these supposed legal conflicts. In the case of the special counsel’s report, DOJ, which would normally argue for its release, has taken Trump’s side. And Judge Cannon has played along.

snip

https://joycevance.substack.com/p/trumps-past-is-catching-up-with-him?r=5n3e&utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true

to retire before Trump leaves office to give him a full lock on the SCOTUS.

I suspect Alito and Thomas might both decide to retire so the rump Senate can ram a couple of replacements through.