Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

SamuelAdams

(205 posts)
Thu May 21, 2026, 01:49 PM 13 hrs ago

Supreme Court term limits Constitutional Amendment introduced

?si=SumBO-P8p6w1aNvA

How do we get Supreme Court term limits? I asked a Congressman

Amanda's Mild Takes

Maryland Representative Johnny Olszewski has introduced a bill called the ROBE Act that would finally give us 18 year term limits on the Supreme Court — and it’s actually a Constitutional amendment. We covered:
-what the amendment does
-why an amendment vs. legislation
-why 18 years??
-what he needs from us to move the needle on this
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court term limits Constitutional Amendment introduced (Original Post) SamuelAdams 13 hrs ago OP
Terrible idea. Bluetus 13 hrs ago #1
several of them deserve to b impeached. mopinko 12 hrs ago #2
I'm fine with that, but the first step Bluetus 5 hrs ago #3

Bluetus

(3,092 posts)
1. Terrible idea.
Thu May 21, 2026, 02:08 PM
13 hrs ago

This would take 20 years. The constitution gives Congress the power to regulate the courts. It is debatable whether that includes term limits. But there is no question that legislation can define the duties of Justices as well as ethical standards. Congress can and should expand the court and place the longest serving Justices into an advisory, non- voting status.

That can happen the day we hold the Presidency, a House majority and 50 Senators who will repeal the filibuster.

mopinko

(73,960 posts)
2. several of them deserve to b impeached.
Thu May 21, 2026, 03:07 PM
12 hrs ago

the least grounds being they lied to get the job. plus the whole bribery thing.

Bluetus

(3,092 posts)
3. I'm fine with that, but the first step
Thu May 21, 2026, 10:06 PM
5 hrs ago

is to narrow the power of the most corrupt ones. And what I am talking about can happen with a simple majority in both houses, whereas removal through impeachment requires 2/3 of the Senate.

My attitude is, go ahead and let them keep their jobs and full pay until they die, but take their vote away -- and that can be done without a Constitutional amendment or a 2/3 Senate majority.

Kick in to the DU tip jar?

This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.

As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.

Tell me more...

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Supreme Court term limits...