Democratic efforts to overhaul the Supreme Court received a significant boost this Thursday when Third Way, a prominent center-left think tank, unveiled a new proposal aimed at reforming the high court. The plan, which was shared exclusively with POLITICO, includes setting an 18-year term limit for justices and establishing a robust, enforceable ethics code.

The proposal emerges at a time when public trust in the Supreme Court is alarmingly low, as highlighted by recent Gallup polls. Third Way's initiative reflects a growing consensus within the Democratic Party, spanning from moderate to progressive factions, about the urgent need for significant judicial reforms.

Lanae Erickson, Senior Vice President at Third Way, emphasized the importance of including these reforms in the political discourse ahead of the 2028 presidential election. “This is one of those things that we think can and should be a part of the 2028 discussion, and those folks who are running should be asked about whether they would champion Supreme Court reform,” Erickson stated.

The call for changes isn't isolated. In June, leaders from various Democratic House caucuses, including the Congressional Progressive Caucus, advocated for similar reforms. They pushed for term limits and a mandatory ethics code for justices, pointing to growing concerns over partisanship and ethical breaches within the court.

Polling data from the Brennan Center for Justice and FOX News supports the push for term limits, showing that over 70 percent of respondents favor such a measure. An 18-year term limit would mean that each president could potentially appoint two justices per term, ensuring a regular infusion of new perspectives into the judiciary.

Moreover, the proposal seeks to hold justices accountable for ethical violations, a move supported by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. In a recent interview, Jeffries called for “dramatic reform” starting with a robust ethics code to prevent justices from acting “above the law.”

Despite the court adopting its first formal ethics code in 2023, critics argue that the measures lack effectiveness. Third Way, however, is not endorsing the expansion of the court’s bench, a measure some Democrats have considered. Erickson described this idea as a path to "mutually assured destruction," fearing it could lead to endless political escalations.

The likelihood of these reforms passing in the near term remains slim without Democratic control over both Congress and the White House. Nonetheless, Third Way’s recommendations aim to demonstrate that centrist Democrats are also prepared to address systemic issues aggressively, hoping to resonate with voters’ concerns about the current state of affairs in the judiciary.

As the debate over Supreme Court reform continues to gain traction, it remains to be seen how these proposals will shape the future of the American judicial system and the broader political landscape.