President Joe Biden has a plan to “reform” the Supreme Court, and while there are some good elements to his proposal, they are undermined by the basis for the overhaul: to thwart former President Donald Trump, should he win re-election.

High Court aside, it doesn’t indicate a high level of confidence that Vice President Kamala Harris will claim victory in November if Biden is trying to Trump-proof the judiciary.

“I have great respect for our institutions and separation of powers,” Biden argues in a Washington Post op-ed published Monday. “What is happening now is not normal, and it undermines the public’s confidence in the court’s decisions, including those impacting personal freedoms. We now stand in a breach.”

“Normal” is code for “in-line with a Democratic agenda.”

When conservative justices prevail, it’s a breach. When liberal justices carry a majority decision, all is well. Democracy — and justice — are reduced to a partisan tug of war.

Biden’s way of “fixing” the “abnormal” court is by limiting the tenure of justices to 18 years. Many have called for age or term limits for years, but the president’s proposal is not so much geared toward ensuring the justices are at their peak on the bench, but as a Trump spoiler. Biden’s plan: Congress would pass legislation to create a system in which the sitting president would appoint a justice every two years, and they’re out after 18.

So every two years the American people would face another partisan gauntlet-run by a jurist getting grilled by lawmakers, infighting, sniping and Senate hearings. That’s a great use of time and resources, all to keep the dreaded conservative voices at bay.

We wonder, though, if Biden thought this through. The justices who would mostly likely feel the impact should this plan, by some miracle, get the green light, would be Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts. All conservatives or moderate conservatives. The chance to replace them must have Democrats champing at the bit. But should Trump win re-election, wouldn’t he be choosing their replacements?

They would be followed in a few years by Justices Sonia Sotomayor (who would hit the 18-year mark in 2027) and Elena Kagan, (2028).

Trump would replace at least one of them, were he to retake the White House.

The personal freedoms Biden cites refer to abortion, specifically the court’s 2022 decision Dobbs v. Jackson which stated that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion.

It’s been 51 years since the Roe v. Wade decision established a Constitutional right to an abortion, and in the decades since there have been Congressional attempts to codify or overturn it. It’s been a contentious mess, and remains so.

But by emphasizing this point, Biden sets up a strike for Harris, underscoring which side Democrats are on, and why women should vote for her.

Which is what this is all about – a campaign strategy to gin up support for Democrats. Which is a shame, because Biden also wants Congress to pass legislation establishing a code of ethics for the court. Justices would have to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have  conflicts of interest.

Brilliant, necessary and hobbled by the ham-fisted attempt to throw spike strips in front of Trump’s bid to re-gain office.

What malarkey.

Editorial cartoon by Gary Varvel (Creators Syndicate)