Article III, Section 1 of the United States Constitution defines the judicial organization as one of the three co-equal branches of government. It states:
The judicial power of the United States shall be vested in a Supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress shall from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges of the Supreme Court and of the inferior Courts shall continue in Office for good Conduct, and shall receive, at stated Times, Compensation for their Services, which Compensation shall not be diminished during their Term of Office.
The statement that judges shall “hold office during good behavior” means that judges cannot be involuntarily removed from office except by Congress’s ultimate power of impeachment and conviction. Kamala Harris does not seem to be too familiar with the Constitution, as she is now publicly supporting unconstitutional attempts by Congress to Introduce term limits for the court.
Finally the Harris-Walz campaign published political positions on its website and proposed a plan that could potentially lead to the forced retirement of Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas by next year, along with two other Republican-appointed judges before the next decade.
Released one day before the Vice President Kamala Harris takes to the debate stage against the former president Donald Trumpthe political draft contains the so-called common sense Supreme Court reforms such as “implementing term limits.” It is unclear how long Harris believes a justice should stay on the Supreme Court before he or she is automatically forced into retirement, and her campaign devoted more attention and detail on its website to attacks on Trump over the three justices he nominated during his single term.
Months into the campaign, weeks after Kamala Harris was named the Democratic nominee (not elected, not nominated), and just weeks until the election, the Harris/Walz campaign team finally releases some policy statements—and one of them is blatantly and stupidly unconstitutional. And it’s consistent with a bill by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), one of the craziest nutcases to ever sit in the Senate. Considering this is a group of people that included the likes of Bernie Sanders, the stupid elderly Bolshevik from Vermont, that’s really saying something.
As mentioned above, Congress does not have the power under the Constitution to do so.
Harris’ campaign, however, has According to reports indicated that her position was “consistent with a more detailed plan” to replace at least three Republican-appointed judges by 2029, according to a statement from her ally, Senator. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) to Send last month.
“They have not gone so far as to say, ‘We support your bill.’ They have said that your bills are exactly what we are talking about,” Whitehouse said of his Senate Bill 3096also known as the Supreme Court Biennial Appointments and Term Limits Act, which imposes an 18-year term limit on judges, although no such limit applies to sitting members of Congress.
The law requires the President to nominate a up-to-date Supreme Court justice and for the Senate to confirm him or her. every two yearsOnly the nine most recently appointed judges would participate in oral hearings, while the remaining judges would effectively retain a pre-retirement status and participate in appeals if necessary, for example in the event of a challenge.
The Harris campaign is therefore “right in line” with an insane bill that will not stand up to any constitutional challenge. Unfortunately, this is completely normal for today’s Democratic Party.
See Appendix: The left-wing Vox ignores the separation of powers and proposes forcing Justices Sotomayor and Kagan into retirement
AOC makes mind-numbing claim: Congress has a “constitutional duty” to “restrain” the Supreme Court
There are many reasons why the nation – not a democracy, but a constitutional republic – was founded as it is. All of these reasons are found in the Constitution, with more detailed explanations in documents such as the Federalist Papers. I have often encouraged people to read the Federalist Papers, explaining that the Constitution is the “what” and the Federalist Papers is the “why.”
Federalist #78 states, among other things:
The complete independence of the courts is especially vital in a confined constitution. By a confined constitution I mean one which contains certain exceptions to the legislative power, such as that it may not pass bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and the like. Limitations of this kind can in practice only be maintained by courts, whose function must be to declare void all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the constitution. Without these, all reservations of certain rights or privileges would be meaningless.
This statement by Alexander Hamilton explains the importance of an independent judiciary. Such independence requires freedom from restrictions imposed by a co-equal branch of government such as Congress or the President. The judiciary must They must, as Hamilton explained, be independent in order to fulfill their duty to “declare void all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution.”
It is a shame that people like Kamala Harris or Sheldon Whitehouse were able to reach their current positions without learning this.
