There's chatter among Democrats of changing the size of the Supreme Court if they win the Congress and the presidency. Just like Republicans talked about changing the size of the Court in 2016 if Hillary Clinton won.
Obviously, this is naked power politics, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be some kind of reform.
I'm intrigued by what New York state does for appellate level courts: terms last 14 years and judges have to retire when they are 70 (I think this age limit applies to elected trial court judges too). I believe a term can be renewed but it is not automatic and has to be approved by the state senate.
I think this lessens the power of the presidency and the SCOTUS-stakes of a presidential election - which distort the race - because in this system, every presidential term is going to get a couple of picks.
And you don't have justices clinging on to a lifetime seat when they should be able to retire (especially if they're ill) because they want to see if a better president/replacement selector is chosen.
Obviously, both ruling parties like the current system because their policies and actions are terrible and indefensible and controlled by corporate money; SCOTUS fear-mongering is a great motivator that prevents them from having to engage in representative governing.
Removing this excuse for corruption and facilitating some real accountability is perhaps the best reason for such a change to be made.
