A bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives would place limits on Supreme Court justices in the wake of several of the court's decisions.
The Supreme Court Tenure Establishment and Retirement Modernization or TERM Act would subject justices to 18-year term limits, after which they would be retired.
The bill comes at a time when confidence in the Supreme Court fell to 25% in June, according to a Gallup poll. This is down from 36% at the same time in 2021.
Georgia U.S. Rep. Hank Johnson - D-Lithonia - introduced the bill and said he feels this could keep the court relevant with the American state of mind.
"Our Supreme Court is not accountable to the people in its present configuration," said Johnson. "And so therefore, term limits will help to infuse modern thinking and keep the United States Supreme Court a modern branch of our democracy."
Should Congress approve the bill, five of the current justices would be retired from the court in throughout the next six years. Associate Justice Clarence Thomas would automatically be retired since he's been on the court for 31 years.
Another element of the bill calls for the most recently retired justice to temporarily serve on the court, should there be less than nine justices.
This is not the first time Johnson has introduced a bill to change the court's layout. In 2021, Johnson introduced the Judiciary Act of 2021, which would have expanded the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13.
Currently, the bill is being referred to a House subcommittee. Johnson said he feels even if this bill were to pass, there is an additional challenge in keeping the court up to date - lifetime tenure.
"We still get into this issue of lifetime tenure of justices who become stale in their thinking," said Johnson, "and more, and more unaccountable to the public, the older that they get."
Johnson said he feels if these bills pass, they will not only diversify the Supreme Court's thinking, but its physical look too.
Part of the hope behind the Judiciary Act of 2021 was to make the court more representative of the country through adding new justices of varying sex, age, ethnicity and legal background.
Currently, said he feels there are too many justices who got their starts in "silk-stocking" law firms.
get more stories like this via email
By Kyla Russell for WISH-TV.
Broadcast version by Joe Ulery for Indiana News Service reporting for the WISH-TV-Free Press Indiana-Public News Service Collaboration
Indiana Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith said he supports efforts to redistrict Indiana's U.S. House seats, and he's seen what could be redrawn maps floating around, but has not seen any official maps.
He shared his thoughts on Friday in a one-on-one interview with I-Team 8.
"People want to scream about gerrymandering. Listen, every state does it. Democrats do it. Republicans do it. I think what Republicans have kind of fallen into the trap of doing for many years in the establishment way of thinking is if we just play nice, they'll play nice, if and when they're in power. We found out that that doesn't happen. So, listen, we've got the ball. We need to run the ball down the field, and we should do everything we can to make big wins for Republican principles, constitutional concepts and I believe ... the Republican Party embodies those principles better than the other party does. So, I'm fully in support of President Trump and his offensive-minded strategy here."
Beckwith told I-Team 8 he does not know exactly what happened on Thursday in a closed-door meeting at the Statehouse with Vice President JD Vance, Gov. Mike Braun and other top state lawmakers.
However, Beckwith said, he is aware of the taxpayer cost to calling a special session.
He says it's worth it.
"I think in the long run, if we can get the outcome that we're looking for, I think it will be certainly we're going to have to spend money. Yes, they are expensive. Nobody takes that lightly. That is certainly a conversation that needs to be had, and we need to look at that. But, I do think if we can take the 1st and 7th districts back, and really make Indiana a powerhouse red state, and then also give Washington a boost with a little bit more in the majority there. I think, economically, it will pay off in the long run, and I think we'll see our investment have big returns."/p<>
Kyla Russell wrote this article for WISH-TV.
get more stories like this via email
A public funding mechanism for Seattle elections is up for renewal in next week's election.
The Democracy Voucher program was passed 10 years ago. It offers voters four $25 vouchers to use each election cycle for candidates who accept certain fundraising and spending limits. Supporters said it is a model for more inclusive democracy, touting higher turnout, increased participation from more small donors and a more diverse candidate field.
Spencer Olson, spokesperson for the group People Powered Elections Seattle, which supports Proposition 1, said the program helps level the playing field.
"It's really important that people's voices are heard and that candidates can run being supported by their constituents," Olson contended. "Versus just listening to those wealthiest donors, those special interests that have historically been the loudest voices at the table and really dominated what priorities rise to the top."
The voucher is supported by a property tax. Olson and other supporters hope to bring the model statewide. Critics said the program is not big enough to make a difference in elections and has not curbed outside spending. Ballots are due by 8 p.m. Tuesday.
Olson pointed out the vouchers have succeeded in encouraging more diverse participation in local elections.
"The intention of the program was to bring a public financing program to Seattle elections to help empower more candidates -- more diverse candidates, women, renters, people of color -- to have equal access to be able to run, and run competitive elections without having to rely on wealthy donors, special interests," Olson emphasized.
Olson noted because the money comes from a dedicated tax levy, unused vouchers roll over to the next election.
"The goal isn't to create an unlimited pot of money but to be able to provide resources for candidates to run with the community's support," Olson stressed. "But it's not a blank check at the same time."
get more stories like this via email
Texas lawmakers will return to Austin on July 21 for a special legislative session called by Gov. Greg Abbott.
The 18 items on the agenda include redrawing congressional maps. Redistricting usually occurs every 10 years, following the census, but Abbott added the item to the agenda after the Department of Justice drew attention to four Democratic seats.
Christina Sanders, founder of the nonprofit PoliChic Engagement Fund, said Texas maps are already caught up in litigation.
"Some of the court cases that are still even pending from the maps that have not been drawn fairly and the potential impact of new maps in the middle of a census cycle," Sanders explained.
The Biden administration sued Texas, alleging the state's legislative and congressional district maps discriminate against Latino and Black voters. The Justice Department, under President Donald Trump, withdrew from the lawsuit earlier this year.
The seats targeted by the Justice Department are held by Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, Rep. Sylvia Garcia, D-Texas, and Rep. Marc Veasey, D-Texas. They are also focused on the vacant seat previously held by late Congressman Sylvester Turner. Following the 2023 legislative session, Abbott called four special sessions to pass a school voucher bill, which failed.
Sanders feels Abbott is using special sessions to push personal agendas.
"A special session would be for something like the flood that just occurred," Sanders argued. "It would be something that there is an emergency -- something immediate needs to happen at this moment -- because this policy for the state cannot wait."
Flood warning systems and communication are also on the agenda, along with hemp and THC legislation and changes to the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness test.
Disclosure: The PoliChic Engagement Fund contributes to our fund for reporting on Civic Engagement, Civil Rights, Community Issues and Volunteering. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email