Bob Peckman’s essay on the need to expand the Supreme Court (“Supreme Court has become a legal crisis,” June 30) suggests court-packing as a solution. But if the system for putting justices on the bench and allowing them to stay there for the rest of their lives remains unchanged, the outcome will likewise remain unchanged.
The Los Angeles Times recently reported that the reputation of the Supreme Court has been diminishing. No wonder. The justices are not impartial interpreters of the law as described in high school civics books. Instead, they are politicians in black robes with way too much power. Congress must curtail some of that power.
Imposing limits on the justices would go further toward upgrading this defective institution. We could adopt Germany’s system where justices serve 12-year terms and have an age restriction of 68.
There should be accountability for justices who deliberately misrepresent themselves during the Senate hearings. For example, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch assured senators that they would not vote to overturn “settled law,” which they said applied to Roe v. Wade. Both belonged to the Federalist Society, and as Mr. Peckman pointed out, that organization championed the overthrow of Roe v. Wade. So recently the two justices did the opposite of what they promised the senators.
The only way to remove a justice is through impeachment, which history has demonstrated is a useless tool. Instead, I suggest we make the changes necessary to remove a justice from the court whenever there is an apparent deviation in rulings from the promises made in confirmation hearings. And not some cumbersome, easy-to-manipulate process but one conducted by a politically neutral executive agency, free of members of the Federalist Society and their liberal counterpart, the American Constitution Society.
Putting more justices on the bench only serves the president in the White House at the time. We need solutions with longer-term consequences.
Steve Bailey, Richmond