Harris Endorses Packing Supreme Court

Vice President Kamala Harris has endorsed legislation to expand the Supreme Court, supporting efforts to impose term limits on justices and restructure the Court as part of a broader Democratic reform agenda.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) revealed that Democrat presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris would back his push for Supreme Court reforms, including imposing 18-year term limits on justices, if she were to become president. Speaking during a Democratic National Convention (DNC) panel alongside Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Whitehouse discussed a "Supreme Court reform" bill that could pass with a simple majority if Democrats control the House, Senate, and White House. The legislation would effectively replace Justices Clarence Thomas and John Roberts while instituting ethics and recusal rules for the Court.

As chairman of the Senate judiciary subcommittee on the courts, Whitehouse previously introduced a bill proposing 18-year term limits and a regular biennial appointment of justices. Under this plan, only the nine most recently appointed justices would vote on key cases. If enacted, the winner of the next presidential election could replace Thomas in 2025 and Roberts in 2027.

Whitehouse emphasized that to bypass the filibuster, the bill would need to be part of an omnibus package that includes Democratic priorities such as national abortion rights and restored voting rights. He suggested this comprehensive approach could gain strong support.

Whitehouse noted that while Biden and Harris had not officially endorsed his bill, their statements on Supreme Court term limits closely align with his legislation. However, Republicans and some Democrats have criticized the plan, with legal experts warning that stripping justices of their duties through term limits could be unconstitutional and amount to court-packing under a different guise. Adam White, a legal scholar appointed by Biden to the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court, argued that such legislation would likely face constitutional challenges.