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)

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.

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.