• Phoenix3875@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    “No one is above the law” seems a bit of circular with the fact that the law is what the Supreme Court says it is. Similarly, who would decide whether a Supreme Court judge violates the purported Code of Conduct?

    I guess it would all come to the legislation branch, but even if the reform goes through, I’m afraid that the political division in the Congress would limit its effectiveness.

    • snooggums@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Similarly, who would decide whether a Supreme Court judge violates the purported Code of Conduct?

      Congress could impeach them, but the bar is high and Republicans have proven they will vote for party over country multiple times.

      • wolfpack86@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think the trick with the term limits is the way this also has teeth. My understanding of one way the term limits thing could work is by moving justices to a senior status… Still technically appointed (and for life) but just not in the starting lineup.

        I would guess that if the above method is the approach, a binding ethics code could have as punishment moving a justice to senior status, effectively benching them.

        • rhombus@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think the hardest part will be enforcing a law like this without also having the numbers to impeach Justices (or pack the court). Otherwise I could see the current court finding some way to rule any kind of reform as being unconstitutional and ignoring it.