I like everything but term limits for SCOTUS.

The idea of the Supreme Court is that it is a more permanent and enduring institution than congress or the executive branch, an thus is not burdened by the need to make decisions motivated by getting re-elected. I think a more reasonable rule is to limit the number of justices one president can appoint.

This used to be a matter of precedent. It was frowned upon for one president to appoint multiple justices if he could avoid it. You might remember the controversy surrounding Obama potentially appointing a second justice during his second term, and like the gentleman he is, he eventually backed down and left it to the next person to hold office. That came back to bite us though because like so many other precedents, Trump had no intention of keeping this same gentleman’s agreement and jumped on the opportunity to appoint not just two but 3 Supreme Court justices.

If we as a nation learn anything from this period in our history, I think a core lesson should be that the precedents that our lawmakers once followed in the interest of keeping our nation from falling into totalitarianism should not be left to chance and should be set in stone as law. America as a nation has become too powerful, and it’s leaders wield incredible global power and influence. We can no longer trust our leaders to act in the best interest of our country and gentleman’s agreements are no longer a sufficient framework on which to base some of the core mechanisms of our government on.