Justice & EqualityIssue #46

Supreme Court Reform — Accountability, Ethics, and Term Limits

The Supreme Court is the only branch of government with no term limits, no binding ethics code, and no meaningful accountability. 18-year terms. Binding ethics. Expand to 18 seats. Supermajority to overturn precedent.

0
binding ethics rules govern the Supreme Court — the only branch of government with none
0
binding ethics rules for Supreme Court justices
The only branch of government — and the only level of the federal judiciary — with no enforceable ethics code
1/year
predictable Supreme Court appointment — no more vacancy crises or strategic retirements
18 seats, 18-year terms = exactly one appointment per year, depoliticized and stable
Section 01
Overview

The two-minute version.

Supreme Court justices serve life terms with no binding ethics code, no term limits, and no meaningful accountability mechanism. The Court is the only branch of the federal government exempt from the ethics rules that apply to all other federal judges. Six of the nine current justices were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote. The Court decides cases affecting 330 million people by 5-4 votes with no supermajority requirement for overturning precedent.

18-year term limits with staggered appointments. Binding ethics code with independent enforcement. Expand the Court to 18 seats phased in over multiple terms. Raise salary to $350K. Supermajority requirement (12 of 18) to overturn established precedent.

Every appointment becomes predictable — one per year, no more vacancy crises. Ethics enforcement ends the era of undisclosed gifts and conflicts of interest. A supermajority requirement protects settled law from narrow 5-4 reversals. The Court becomes more representative, more accountable, and more legitimate.

You just read the simple version. Keep scrolling for the full picture.Next: What's broken
Section 02
What's Broken

Article III of the Constitution provides that federal judges 'shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour' — interpreted as life tenure. The framers intended judicial independence, but they could not have anticipated justices serving 30-40 year terms in an era when the average lifespan was 38. The result is a system where the timing of deaths and retirements — pure chance — determines the ideological direction of American law for decades. Strategic retirement (timing departure to align with a favorable president) has become the norm, turning the Court into a political chess game.

Source: [PAPER] §How We Got Here (Article III; historical context)

The Supreme Court has no binding ethics code. Every other federal judge is governed by the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, administered by the Judicial Conference. The Supreme Court exempted itself. In 2023, following reporting by ProPublica revealing that Justice Clarence Thomas accepted undisclosed gifts worth millions of dollars from billionaire Harlan Crow — including luxury travel, private jet flights, a yacht trip, tuition payments for a relative, and the purchase of Thomas's mother's home — the Court adopted a voluntary 'Statement of Ethics Principles.' It has no enforcement mechanism, no independent investigation authority, and no consequences for violations.

Source: [PAPER] §The Problem (ProPublica reporting; Fix the Court; Statement of Ethics Principles 2023)

The number of Supreme Court justices is not set by the Constitution. Congress has changed the size of the Court seven times: 6 (1789), 5 (1801), 7 (1807), 9 (1837), 10 (1863), 7 (1866), and 9 (1869). The current number — nine — has held since 1869, but there is nothing constitutionally sacred about it. Meanwhile, the Court's workload has changed dramatically: the federal system has grown from 30 judges in 1789 to over 870 today, the population from 4 million to 330 million, and cert petitions from a few hundred per year to approximately 7,000-8,000 annually.

Source: [PAPER] §How We Got Here (Judiciary Act of 1789; historical Court sizes; SCOTUS workload data)

Six of the nine current justices were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote (three by George W. Bush, three by Donald Trump). This means the branch of government with the most power and the least accountability is the one with the weakest democratic legitimacy. A bare majority of five justices — potentially all appointed by popular-vote-losing presidents — can overturn decades of settled precedent, as happened with Dobbs v. Jackson (2022), which overruled 49 years of Roe v. Wade. No supermajority requirement exists for such momentous reversals.

Source: [PAPER] §The Problem (Electoral data; Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 2022)

How the US compares.

What Americans face vs. what peer nations achieve.

MeasureUSPeer Nation
Ethics codeNone (binding)Every other federal court(All other federal judges bound by the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges)
Term limitsLife tenureMajor democracies(Germany: 12 years. UK: mandatory retirement at 70. Canada: mandatory retirement at 75.)
Court size vs. population9 for 330MGermany(16 justices for 84M — nearly 2x the ratio of justices-to-population)
Justices appointed by popular-vote losers6 of 967%(Supermajority of the Court lacks direct democratic mandate)
Section 03
Our Plan

"Every other major democracy has figured out that a supreme court needs term limits, an ethics code, and accountability mechanisms. The idea that nine people should serve for life with no rules, no oversight, and no consequences is not judicial independence — it is judicial monarchy. We can do better."

The Common Good Party — Supreme Court Reform Policy

What the CGP plan actually does

18-year staggered term limits
Each president appoints 2 justices per 4-year term — one in year 1, one in year 3. After 18 years, justices rotate to senior status on federal circuit courts (still serving, still paid, still contributing to the judiciary — but no longer on the Supreme Court). This eliminates strategic retirements, reduces the stakes of any single appointment, and ensures the Court reflects the evolving will of the electorate.
Binding ethics code with independent enforcement
A mandatory code of conduct matching what applies to every other federal judge — plus independent investigation and enforcement authority. Mandatory recusal when a justice has a financial interest in a case or a personal relationship with a party. Comprehensive gift ban. Financial disclosure requirements matching what members of Congress must file. No more self-policing.
Raise salary to $350,000/year
Justices currently earn approximately $298,500 (Chief Justice: $312,200). Raising base salary to $350,000 ensures the position attracts the best legal minds based on the work itself — not post-retirement book deals, speaking fees, or 'gifts' from billionaire benefactors. Well-compensated justices have less incentive to accept outside benefits that create conflicts of interest.
Expand the Court to 18 seats
Phase in expansion over multiple presidential terms so no single president packs the Court. With 18 justices and 18-year terms, exactly one seat opens every year — predictable, stable, depoliticized. The Constitution sets no number of justices. Congress has changed the size 7 times. Nine justices for 330 million people and 7,000-8,000 cert petitions per year is inadequate. Larger panels allow more cases to be heard and reduce the outsized influence of any single justice.
Supermajority to overturn precedent
Require a 2/3 supermajority (12 of 18 justices) to overturn established precedent. Stare decisis — the principle that settled law should not be lightly overturned — is fundamental to legal stability. A bare majority of one justice should not be able to reverse decades of settled law that millions of people have relied upon. This protects both progressive and conservative precedent from narrow ideological swings.
Section 04
How Your Life Changes

Term limits transform the appointment process. Instead of the current system — where a single vacancy can become a national crisis (Merrick Garland, 2016; Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 2020) — appointments become routine. One seat opens every year. Every president gets the same number of appointments. No more incentive to appoint the youngest possible candidate to maximize tenure. No more strategic retirements timed to the 'right' president. No more death-watch politics. The Court's composition naturally evolves with the electorate over an 18-year cycle.

A binding ethics code restores public trust. When ProPublica revealed that Justice Thomas accepted undisclosed luxury trips, private jet flights, and a real estate transaction from a billionaire with interests before the Court — and nothing happened — public confidence in the Court dropped to historic lows. Gallup reported approval of the Supreme Court at 40% in 2023, down from 62% in 2000. Independent enforcement means justices face real consequences for real violations, just like every other federal judge in America.

Expanding to 18 seats is not 'court packing' — it is court modernization. The Court was last sized at 9 in 1869, when the U.S. population was 38 million and the federal judiciary had a fraction of its current caseload. Nine justices for 330 million people means each justice effectively represents 37 million Americans — more than the population of Canada's Supreme Court jurisdiction per justice. An 18-member court can hear more cases (currently the Court accepts only 70-80 of ~7,500 cert petitions), form smaller panels for less consequential cases, and reduce the outsized influence of any single justice's ideology.

The supermajority requirement for overturning precedent protects everyone. Conservatives who value stability should welcome a rule that prevents a future liberal court from overturning Heller (gun rights) by a 5-4 vote. Progressives who value rights should welcome a rule that would have prevented Dobbs from overturning Roe by a single vote. The principle is neutral: settled law that millions of people have relied upon should not be reversed by the narrowest possible margin. Twelve of eighteen justices — a genuine supermajority — provides the stability that stare decisis was always supposed to deliver.

What changes under the CGP plan

Predictable appointments — one per year
No more vacancy crises. Every president appoints exactly 2 justices per term. The Court evolves with the electorate.
Binding ethics with real enforcement
Independent investigation authority. Mandatory recusal. Gift ban. Financial disclosure. No more self-policing.
Justices rotate to circuit courts after 18 years
Not fired — reassigned. Still serving, still paid, still contributing to the judiciary. Just not on the Supreme Court.
18 seats — phased in over multiple terms
No single president packs the Court. Expansion happens gradually. The Constitution sets no number — Congress has changed it 7 times.
Supermajority (12/18) to overturn precedent
Settled law protected from narrow ideological swings. Both conservative and progressive precedent gains stability.
$350K salary — attract talent, reduce conflicts
Well-compensated justices do not need billionaire benefactors, book deals, or speaking fees to maintain their standard of living.

"Life tenure with zero accountability is not judicial independence. It is judicial monarchy. Every other major democracy has term limits, ethics codes, and accountability for their highest court. The American experiment does not require that we be the last democracy on Earth to figure this out."

CGP Supreme Court Reform Policy — §Executive Summary
Section 05
What Works Globally
🇩🇪
Germany
Federal Constitutional Court: 16 justices, 12-year non-renewable terms, mandatory retirement at 68
12 yearsnon-renewable terms — no strategic retirement games
🇬🇧
United Kingdom
Supreme Court: 12 justices, mandatory retirement at 70, appointed by independent commission
Mandatoryretirement at 70 — no life tenure
🇨🇦
Canada
Supreme Court: 9 justices, mandatory retirement at 75, regional representation requirements
Age 75mandatory retirement — predictable, depoliticized turnover
🇫🇷
France
Constitutional Council: 9 members, 9-year non-renewable terms, one-third replaced every 3 years
9 yearsstaggered terms ensure regular, predictable appointments
Section 06
Compare Parties

See where every side actually stands.

Current federal law, the Democratic Party's 2024 platform, the Republican Party's 2024 platform, and our plan — side by side, sourced to the record.

Open the side-by-side comparison
Section 07
Full Policy Paper
The complete legislative framework

The homework other parties skip. We did it.

Sourced, cited, costed, and written to a standard that could walk into a legislative office tomorrow. 1,025 words across 5 pillars.

Sources & references
See also