Vice President Kamala Harris recently announced her openness to imposing "some kind of reform" on America's highest judicial body.

However, critics contend that some of the Supreme Court reform ideas being put forward by Democrats would be unconstitutional. 

"We can study what that actually looks like"

According to Breitbart, Harris' statement was made on Wednesday during a town hall event hosted by CNN anchor Anderson Cooper.

At one point a participant asked if she is "in favor of expanding the court to say, 12, so each justice has only one circuit court, other than [the] chief justice to assist in making judgments more balanced?"

Harris responded, responded that "there should be some kind of reform of the court, and we can study what that actually looks like."

A social media account run by Harris's campaign subsequently posted a clip of the candidate's remarks and reiterated her message.

Harris campaign: Trump "hand-selected three members of the Supreme Court"

"Vice President Harris: When Donald Trump was president, he hand-selected three members of the Supreme Court with the intention that they would undo the protections of Roe v. Wade and they did as he intended," the campaign stated.

Donald Trump hand-selected three members of the Supreme Court with the intention that they would undo the protections of Roe v. Wade. They did as he intended.

Now, in 20 states, we have Trump Abortion Bans—and women have died because of them.pic.twitter.com/65nbpblZcp

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) October 24, 2024

"And now in 20 states, we have Trump Abortion Bans, some of which make no exception even for rape or incest," it went on to declare.

Ilhan Omar calls for "expanding the number of justices"

Harris' comments are in line with similar remarks made by radical members of her party, including Minnesota Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar.

Fox News reported on Tuesday that Omar said in a social media post, "We need to radically reform the broken Supreme Court."

Specifically, Omar called for "expanding the number of justices" and creating "a binding, enforceable code of ethics" as well as "imposing term limits."

Yet Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett predicted earlier this year that there is "zero chance" that such an approach would pass constitutional muster.

He noted that the Constitution grants lifetime appointments to justices while arguing that an ethics code imposed by congress would violate the separation of powers doctrine.