Jack Bernard: Reforming the U.S. Supreme Court should be a bipartisan issue

“The rescinding of Roe v. Wade will be a major step in America’s journey to protect the unborn. Our God-given rights depend on safeguarding the first essential, inalienable right — the right to life.” - Rep. Michael Cloud  

There are three branches of national government. The executive and legislative branches are elected, political by nature. However, the third branch, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), is appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate.

More: Jack Bernard: Right-wing extremists have infiltrated the U.S. military

Historically, SCOTUS was not political, serving as a stabilizing force via stare decisis (use of precedent). Historically, SCOTUS has been the non-political conscientious of the nation. Members were appointed for life.

However, in recent decades, the court has lost the faith of our citizenry. Because SCOTUS has become highly politicized and failed ethically, advocating for unpopular right-wing policies like the above anti-choice decision, regardless of precedent.

More: Don’t look to Chicago; NC has its own gun problem

Gallup polling has established that disapproval of the court has gone from 29% in 2000 to an astounding 58% in 2022. That was even before the recent Clarence Thomas ethics issues have come to light. For those of you unaware, Thomas has accepted a variety of outrageous gifts — yacht trips, vacations, family tuition, etc. — from a Dallas billionaire GOP donor, Harlan Crow.

More: Jack Bernard: Despite what NC’s Hudson says, both parties to blame for deficit

Further, when asked “How much trust and confidence do you have at this time in the judicial branch headed by the U.S. Supreme Court?” respondents were much more negative in 2022 (53%) versus 2000 (31%). In 2022, 42% believed the court to be too conservative versus only 18% believing it to be too liberal.

Another study found that support for SCOTUS has become highly politicized. Only 28% of Democrats have a favorable view of the court (2022), versus 73% of Republicans. In 1987, 80% of GOP respondents supported SCOTUS versus 75% of Democrats. Similarly, nearly two thirds (64%) of Democrats believe the court has too much power versus less than a fourth (23%) of Republicans.

So, what can be done to fix an obviously broken court? There are several remedies, including term limits, expansion of the court and ethics policy establishment and enforcement.

In 1776, the average life span was 35. Our life span is now close to 80. There was no need for term limits when the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution. But there is now, which is why presidents are now limited to two terms. We should do the same for Supreme Court Justices. Even Chief Justice John Roberts supports the idea.

Rep. Hank Johnson (GA-4) and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) introduced legislation last year to enact 18-year term limits. But it has gone nowhere, although virtually all nations do have term limits for their SCOTUS equivalents.

In a Boston Globe editorial, Senator Warren outlined how Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump “hijacked” the court. As she states, Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution permits Congress to establish the size of SCOTUS and it has varied widely since 1776. By expanding the size of the court, we can return balance and restore credibility.

Finally, ethics reform is key to acheiving public acceptance of the court. Specifically, we must have a strong written SCOTUS ethics policy with a clear enforcement mechanism separate from the Court. We currently have none, and Chief Justice Roberts has made it clear that he believes SCOTUS does not need one.

Meanwhile, there have been recent revelations coming out about how the Court does not police itself. For example, a nonprofit media outlet has been investigating the Clarence Thomas situation. Thomas has not declared the gifts he has received from Crow, which include $6,000/month tuition for Thomas’ grandnephew, said to total $150,000. Crow also funded a political action group which paid Thomas’ wife a $120,000 a year salary.

So far, the reaction of GOP politicians has been to ignore the accusations, or to call them bigoted. As a recent MSNBC column pointed out, could you imagine how they would react if the situation were reversed and a liberal justice were getting funds from billionaire George Soros, who donates to progressive causes and candidates?

Reforming SCOTUS should be a bi-partisan issue and addressed ASAP. But our nation is divided into warring tribes, and with politicians like Cloud exploiting differences, it’s a situation we will live with for the foreseeable future.

Jack Bernard is the former director of Health Planning for Georgia and a retired high-level executive with a healthcare corporation. He was one of the founders of Premier, Inc. in Charlotte. He is a widely published health reform columnist.

This article originally appeared on The Fayetteville Observer: Jack Bernard: Reforming the U.S. Supreme Court should be bipartisan