Introduce Amendments to Stop Political Abuse of Supreme Court Justices/Other Nominations

0 have signed. Let’s get to 100!

These are bipartisan issues even if they mention the Supreme Courts recent nomination. Since the recent death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the fighting the has ensued about the filling of the seat she left, has brought to light problems that needs to be addressed. 

Joe Biden had said in a 1992 Senate floor speech -- when there were no high court vacancies to fill -- that "once the political season is under way, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over."

In 2016, after the death of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Scalia. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said, "The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president," 11 months before the election and before a nomination was announced. Following the election and signing in of the new republican president the nomination moved forward and was rejected. The Supreme Court seat was then filled by the new president's nominee.

Now in 2020, we witness as that same Majority Leader changes positions. With only 47 days until the election (average time for a nominations review is 67 days according to the Congressional Research Service) he tries to rush through a nomination and fill late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's empty Supreme Court seat. 

The Supreme Court is expected to be a nonpartisan group. Yet with these actions alone McConnell has clearly shown that he is trying to fill the court with justices that have personal views aligned closer to his party. To combat this abuse of our Supreme Court system amendments should be added to the Appointment Clause. 

The Supreme Court is an itegral part of the US system. The act of tabling a nomination and leaving a court seat open interferes with that system and its rulings. - The first amendment should introduce a maximum amount of time of 3 months  before a Supreme Court Justice nomination has to be addressed.

The election is when the people let their voices be heard. Near the end of their term a president, if they have senate support, could send their nominations straight through. Even while the people are voting for the next term's president. This allows the people to have more control over the system instead of parties - The second amendment should set a cut-off point of 6 months before elections for Supreme Court nominations.

To keep our system from devolving into a gridlocked state, and to try and keep it fair for everyone. We can't allow rejections based purely on party views, even more so when it comes down to judicial appointments. Justices swear to judge by interpretation of the constitution, not personal beliefs. While those beliefs can affect a justice's interpretation, blocking worthy nominees because of them only politicises the court more. Nominees should be considered solely on experience and merit. The third and last amendment should require that the reasons for rejection or acceptance of all nominations are thoroughly explained to combat partisanship.