Reply to mandatory retirement for supreme court judges

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "mandatory retirement for supreme court judges"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I think we should have a fixed 18 year term.  Having Presidents feel pressure to name a younger appointee, rather than the best, and having justiceste a replacement, or so there aren't multiple vacancies in one year, makes no sense.[/quote]
That is an interesting approach.  I think you are right that it would be better to limit the ability to stuff the court with young justices for political advantage.  I'd rather have that than a mandatory retirement age.  [/quote]
Perhaps with staggered terms starting in odd years so that each presidency would have one appointment late in its first year and one in the third, separated from elections.  Also, how about letting the justices themselves elect the chief justice, maybe for three year terms.

What is your bet on the possibility of getting such an amendment through the Congress and the states.  Would there be a rash of different ideas coming up and causing even more division than we have now?  How would the transition be handled -- I would guess that the present justices cannot be forced to leave office to make way for a new one each two years.  But assuming it passed in 2013 or 2014, the first appointment following could end in 2033, the next in 2035, etc.  They would not be exactly eighteen years, but eventually it would stabilize; and it would suggest a time for the present justices to choose to retire.

Gosh it's fun rewriting the Constitution![/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics