There are no term limits for US Supreme Court justices. According to Article III, Section I, of the Constitution, Supreme Court justices hold their offices "during good behavior," meaning for life, as long as they don't commit an impeachable offense.
I'd like our democrat lawmakers and some republican lawmakers (who would get onboard to this idea) to pursue amending our constitution to limit a term a supreme court justice can serve, a lifetime on the bench is too lengthy. I would like to see justices serve no more than two 2 year terms.
Dockadams Wrote:There are no term limits for US Supreme Court justices. According to Article III, Section I, of the Constitution, Supreme Court justices hold their offices "during good behavior," meaning for life, as long as they don't commit an impeachable offense.I'd like our democrat lawmakers and some republican lawmakers (who would get onboard to this idea) to pursue amending our constitution to limit a term a supreme court justice can serve, a lifetime on the bench is too lengthy. I would like to see justices serve no more than two 2 year terms.
I don't necessarily disagree with you Dock, but you and I know how exponentially difficult it is to change the Constitution.
I think the better option would be for Democrats to pack the Courts whenever we get off our ass and vote again. The Constitution says nothing about the number of Justices that should comprise the Supreme Court or any other Federal Court. Well, that's if Republicans don't do it before we get a chance to.
There should be limts. I don't expect that it will happen but hopefully it can be discussed further. Each side wants to maximize any perceived advantage.
Not sure what I believe would be reasonable. 20 years seems significant.
lonely bird Wrote: Dock, I feel your pain. Madison warned of factions. Well, we immediately had factions after the ratification of the constitution. ALL decisions made in government of any consequence are political in nature. The rationale that lifetime appointments to the SCOTUS would remove politics from their decision-making was naive in the extreme, more proof that the founders were gods with feet of clay. Electing judges in any state is political. The same would be true of electing SCOTUS justices. The question becomes if we term limit them, which were I to do it would be say 15 or 20 years, would we be subject to constantly changing decisions. I don't know. I do know that the whole confirmation process has become a sham. From Roe v Wade being the sole basis for some senators to outright lying by nominees it has become theatre of the absurd.
Dutch Wrote:lonely bird Wrote: Dock, I feel your pain. Madison warned of factions. Well, we immediately had factions after the ratification of the constitution. ALL decisions made in government of any consequence are political in nature. The rationale that lifetime appointments to the SCOTUS would remove politics from their decision-making was naive in the extreme, more proof that the founders were gods with feet of clay. Electing judges in any state is political. The same would be true of electing SCOTUS justices. The question becomes if we term limit them, which were I to do it would be say 15 or 20 years, would we be subject to constantly changing decisions. I don't know. I do know that the whole confirmation process has become a sham. From Roe v Wade being the sole basis for some senators to outright lying by nominees it has become theatre of the absurd. Lonely, yes the whole thing is absurd; in a life span of about 90 years; the world changes, but not the "judges" they still live in 1800. Yes this "island" is crazy, with crazy antique laws.