Supreme Court of the United States Reform
“The American People deserve to have more of a direct voice in choosing who serves on this Court.”
-Denard
The Issue:
Established by Article III of our Constitution, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) serves as our nation’s seat of judicial authority. In its current form, the Constitution outlines that a Supreme Court Justice is appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate. The judicial branch is presently the only branch of our government that does not give registered voters a direct voice into who serves. The proposed legislation aims to address this.
With the Court’s recent decision to not block the anti-abortion law SB8 passed by the Texas legislature, there have been renewed calls to expand the court once again. While I believe this is certainly an option to be explored, it is still a short-term solution; a solution that is completely dependent on which party holds the majority in our Congress. The People’s Voice Act presents a long-term solution to this issue. By giving American voters a voice in who ascends to this lifetime appointment, we strengthen our democracy; because when we ALL vote, our government can start to look and function a bit more like a government of ALL the People, by ALL the People, and for ALL the People.
Precedent:
The United States Constitution was ratified in 1788. In its original ratified form, Article I (which establishes Congress as the Legislative branch of our Federal Government), Sec. 3 gave the power to select U.S. Senators to the legislature of the States:
“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the legislature thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.” [Article I]
It wasn’t until the ratification of Amendment 17 on April 8, 1913 that this was changed and the power to elect U.S. Senators was given to the people of each State:
“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.” [Amendment 17]
It is my belief that this establishes a solid precedent to pass, and ratify The People’s Voice Act (A28).
Constitutional Authority:
The U.S. Constitution grants Congress regulatory authority over the Supreme Court of the United States. A common use of this regulatory authority has manifested itself in previous decades as both expanding, and shrinking the size of the Court. As the Constitution does not outline a specific number of Justices to serve on the Court, Congress has the authority to, by law, increase and decrease the number of Justices serving on the Court at one time. Though the Judiciary Act of 1789 outlined the first Court to be comprised of one Chief Justice, and five Associate Justices, the regulatory power granted to Congress is cemented in Article III, section 2 of the Constitution:
“In all case affecting ambassadors, other public ministries and consuls, and those in which a State shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.” [Article III]
This Constitutional authority also gives Congress the power to regulate, by law, the process by which a Justice comes to serve on the Court. The People’s Voice Act would not take anything away from the current process, but would grant the American people a direct voice in who serves on our nation’s highest Court.
Article V of the United States Constitution grants Congress the authority to propose amendments to the Constitution, with the approval of two-thirds of both houses. This article also outlines that two-thirds of the State legislatures can petition Congress to call a convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution.
“The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three-fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.” [Article V]
benefit to California:
The People’s Voice Act would give over 22 million eligible California voters a direct voice in who serves on our nation’s highest Court.
proposed legislation:
Amendment 28 (A28) to be known as The People’s Voice Act.
[Amendment 28]