The recent and not altogether surprising revelation that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has for years accepted luxury travel accommodations paid for by a prominent Republican donor — Thomas and his wife, Ginni, a right-wing activist and pro-Trump zealot, apparently do not spend their entire vacation in an RV — has once again prompted calls for reform of America's highest court. Thomas's evident disdain for ethical standards, which includes his blithe attitude toward his wife's activism, has contributed to the Supreme Court's steadily declining approval ratings. To critics, this is simply another example of the court's commitment to a partisan agenda rather than the dispassionate interpretation of the law.
Given that Justice Thomas can act with impunity — impeachment, the only constitutional method for removing a Supreme Court justice, has become an empty threat — his behavior is likely to renew the notion of imposing term limits for the justices. The benefits are obvious. Not only would term limits ensure a periodic shift in the Court's makeup and likely its philosophical orientation, they would also remove the incentive to nominate only men or women young enough to serve for almost half a century. Thomas was 43 when he joined the court in 1991. Amy Coney Barrett was 48 when nominated by Trump in 2020. John Roberts became chief justice in 2005 at age 50.
