Opinion: Joe Biden sets his final price with offer to ‘limit’ the Supreme Court

This week, President Joe Biden finally named a price. As a growing number of panicked Democrats moved to force him off the ticket before the convention, Biden has offered something that the far left has demanded for years: limiting the Supreme Court.

It was another defining moment for Biden, and it was far from complimentary.

Winston Churchill once purportedly asked an English socialite at a dinner if her principles would prevent her from sleeping with him for 5 million pounds.

The socialite admitted that it would be hard to turn down such a fortune. Churchill then offered five pounds. When his aghast antagonist asked, “What type of woman do you think I am?” Churchill replied “We’ve already established that. Now we are haggling about the price.”

This week, Biden finally stopped haggling and set his price.

According to the Washington Post , the president held a Zoom call with the left-wing Congressional Progressive Caucus, chaired by Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D.-Wash.) and co-chaired by Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.).

He thrilled them by agreeing to “come out with a major initiative on limiting the court.” He added that he was looking to them for support because “I need some help.”

Even the New York Times noted the timing as a shift in his position that would appeal to the far left of his party.

It was another reversal for the president prompted by political expediency like his flipping on the filibuster rule and, years ago, on abortion.

In the 2020 election, many of us were highly critical of Biden for refusing to reveal his position on packing the Supreme Court and other so-called reform proposals. It was one of the major issues in the election, but Biden refused to tell voters where he stood to avoid alienating both moderates and the far left.

Liberal professors, pundits and politicians, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), continued to demand that the court be packed with an instant liberal majority.

During his administration, Biden sought to appease his base by establishing a commission that explored absurd, radical proposals for changing the court. As many of us predicted, Biden waited years and later admitted that he had no intention to pack the court.

He then decided to run for reelection and faced a revolt in his party, including hysteria over his dismal polling numbers.

If those numbers were 10 points higher, the Supreme Court might be safe for another 10 years. However, it is now just another price for power.

In decades of public service, Biden has shown an impressive moral and political flexibility. He has shifted on almost every major issue as polls made his earlier positions unpopular, or when trying to appeal to a larger Democratic constituency.

From abortion to gun rights to criminal justice, Biden does not allow principle to stand in the way of politics, and the politics today could not be more dire.

What is most striking about a term limits proposal is that it is completely removed from the substance of the left’s complaints. Ironically, while many believe that President Biden is too enfeebled to serve as president, no one has credibly made that claim about the older justices.

Oral arguments show that members such as Justice Clarence Thomas are active and impressive in questioning counsel in oral argument. One can certainly disagree with Thomas’s jurisprudential views, but there is no basis to question his mental acuity.

The irony is crushing. Faced with calls for him to step aside due to his own cognitive decline, Biden is seeking to win reelection by pushing aside justices who are clearly more mentally fit for their own positions.

Term limits would hit conservatives harder than liberals on the court. It is reminiscent of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s transparent and nonsensical 1937 effort to appoint a new justice for any justice who reaches the age of 70 and refuses to resign.

It just so happened that the age rule would negate the elderly “Four Horsemen” who were standing in the way of his New Deal legislation and allow him to instantly pack the court with six new Democratically-selected members.

When the court suddenly began to approve his programs in what was called “the switch in time that saved nine,” Democrats dropped the scheme.

Biden appears set to try to limit the court through legislation rather than a constitutional amendment since he knows that he could never get an amendment through Congress or the requisite three-quarters of state legislatures.

It is not clear whether the new scheme would pass constitutional muster. Ultimately, it would have to be reviewed by . . . you guessed it . . . the Supreme Court.

The Biden legislation will likely be no more consequential than his Supreme Court commission. But it will be a cathartic moment for the far left, and it dangles the prospect of other changes, including court packing, if Democrats can secure both houses of Congress.

Those calls will only increase as advocates call for changing the court “ by any means necessary .” We have already seen protesters harass justices at their homes and law professors encouraging the mob to get “ more aggressive ” in targeting individual justices.

The saddest aspect of this announcement is not what it says about the Supreme Court. The court was designed by the Framers to withstand such attacks. It was designed for this very moment.

The saddest aspect is what it says about a president who is done haggling. With a mutiny building in his party, President Biden is signaling that everything must go in a political Black Friday clearance.

The Supreme Court is just the latest political commodity. But Biden has to wonder if this is all worth the prize even if he is able to make it beyond the Democratic National Convention.

Tell us this, Mr. President: When the haggling is over, what will be left of your legacy beyond your final asking price?

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “ The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage ” (Simon & Schuster, June 18, 2024).

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.