The Big Q&A with Term Limit The Court

Most Americans agree the Supreme Court needs to be reformed. Term Limit The Court believes 18-year terms are the answer.

With Justice Clarence Thomas back in the news for having failed to report a windfall loan forgiveness of over a quarter million dollars, people are fed up and want solutions. One of them is term limits.

Term Limit the Court (TLTC) is a new public-advocacy organization dedicated to passing into law term limits for Supreme Court Justices. Its Executive Director is Alan Cohn, a Peabody and Emmy Award winning investigative reporter. He works alongside Senior Advisor Andrew Warren, the duly elected State Attorney of Hillsborough County, FL—yes, the prosecutor Gov. Ron DeSantis fired. 

TLTC is a bi-partisan effort with an advisory board composed of former judges, former elected officials, and Constitutional law experts. I had a chance to ask them about their mission and hear about their big idea. — George

Public perception of the Supreme Court has fallen to historic lows. Many people want to see reform. Why are term limits the way to go, and not something like expansion of the Court? 

According to a recent poll, only a third of registered voters approved of the Supreme Court.  That’s dangerous to our country since the court’s credibility is derived from our shared faith in its fairness. 

As I said on the steps of the Supreme Court when we announced our effort Term Limit the Court, the idea of the framers for lifelong terms was to allow justices to be immune from politics and public pressure.  But it’s also made them detached, removed, unconcerned about kicking precedent aside and taking away, for example, rights women have had for half a century to make their own health care decisions.  

And George, Justice Thomas has made it clear he wants to go after the LGTBQ community next. Writing in a concurring opinion, Thomas said the court should “reconsider” its past rulings codifying rights to contraception access, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage. Term limits would increase accountability by making the composition of the court more broadly responsive to the outcome of democratic elections over time. 

Term limits would encourage fresh perspectives on the Court and ensure that justices don’t lose touch with the will of the American people. It would also return the average tenure of justices to 18 years, where it had been for most of American history before doubling over the last generation. 

Term limits would minimize the highly partisan political battles over nominations by guaranteeing regular appointments to the Court and removing the current incentive to nominate younger, less experienced judges simply because they can serve longer. 

Expanding the court is less popular and is often viewed as a way for the party in power to “stack” the court, which could lead to multiple rounds of expansion when a different party is in power.  By contrast, term limits are a single strategic fix that would stabilize the court indefinitely. 

Can you explain, as straightforwardly as you can how term limits would work?  Would it apply to all the current justices? Aren’t some of them already past the limit? 

There are several ways that term limits could work.  One proposal is to have 18-year terms, staggering the implementation so that each of the nine current justices term out every two years. 

Staggering the 18-year terms means that a new justice would be appointed every two years, giving every president two appointments in a four-year term. 

When a justice completes his or her term, they would be able to continue their service as a federal judge on a lower court, and they could also fill in on Supreme Court cases where there was a recusal or absence from another active justice. This "senior status" structure is currently how it works with federal judges at the appellate and trial court level. 

Two current justices have served more than 18 years – Thomas (32 years) and Roberts (18) and Alito will hit 18 years in January 2024. 

There are different views on whether current members of the Supreme Court should be grandfathered.  While some people may look to term limits to end the reigns of Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, we’re taking a longer view of fixing the systemic dysfunction on the high court. In the final analysis, this needs to be a bill that can pass in Congress and be signed into law. 

There have been many ethical lapses on the Court, most notably Justice Clarence Thomas, who has been profiting off of his position shamelessly. Will term limits actually do anything to address the lack of ethics on this Court? 

Term limits would help improve ethical standards by ensuring that, as Chief Justice Roberts once explained, no justice spends decades in an ivory tower existence in which he loses touch with reality. 

Term Limit the Court is also working alongside other organizations committed to broader Supreme Court reforms, including implementing more strict ethical standards. 

We want to make it clear this effort isn't a reaction to recent rulings and ethics scandals. The Supreme Court has far ranging impact on our lives and liberties. It was the Supreme Court in 1944 (Korematsu v. United States) that ruled the internment of Japanese Americans during World War Two was a "military necessity." Widely considered one of the worst Supreme Court decisions in history and repudiated by Chief Justice Roberts in 2018.

Your organization is lobbying for Supreme Court term limits. Who do you count among your biggest supporters, and are there any conservatives among them? 

There are the members of Congress sponsoring legislation like the TERM Act, including Reps.  Hank Johnson (D-GA), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Dan Goldman (D-NY), and Jerry Nadler (D-NY.  Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) is preparing his own legislation in the Senate. When he offered similar legislation last year, it was co-sponsored by Cory Booker (D-NJ), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and others. The idea of SCOTUS term limits has even been supported by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX). Our advisory board includes Jim Jones, the former Republican Attorney General and Supreme Court Justice of Idaho, and Retired Federal Judge Nancy Gertner, a member of the White House Commission on the Supreme Court. 

There has been a lot of ink spilled over Court reform, including a big report by an independent commission.  But with gridlock and deadlock in Congress, how would something like term limits ever get through and become law? And would the president sign it? 

That’s why we’re here. To help build a movement. It’s clear this is what the American people want. We’re in it for the long haul. It won’t be accomplished today. The beauty of 18-year terms on the Supreme Court with justices then moving to “senior status” is many experts believe it wouldn’t require a constitutional amendment, which is extremely difficult to accomplish. The mission of Term Limit the Court is to help build momentum and effective messaging to the public, resulting in creating pressure on Congress to act. We’ll support candidates supportive of our goal. That’s why public support for what we’re doing is crucial. The issue has always enjoyed bipartisan support. It’s our job to help marshal and mobilize support for term limits.  The court itself has been making its own case for term limits because it’s evident that when you have no need for concern over public perception, it’s an invitation to take liberties when it comes to rulings based on political views and free trips and sweetheart deals from billionaires with business before the court. We’re setting the stage for the day when Congress will once again be capable of legislating. It was President Biden’s own commission that opened the door to term limits. We intend to help deliver a bill that he or a future President will sign into law. As Justice Thurgood Marshall once said, “Sometimes history takes things into its own hands.”

Alan M. Cohn is a Peabody Award winning investigative journalist. 

Andrew Warren is the duly elected State Attorney of Hillsborough County, FL. 

Learn more at TermLimitTheCourt.com.