I have changed my mind about a belief I have had for years.

[Mr.Bill]

I used to think that no judge should be appointed for a life long term.

Recent court decisions regarding the election have shown me that if a judge is appointed for life, there is no incentive for them to do any favors for the politician who appointed them.

[Zoonart]

1. Exactly!

[Ms. Toad]

2. That's the major argument for lifetime appointments.

Over time, judges appointed for life are freer to reject the death penalty (you don't have to kill people to prove you are tough on crime), to agree with the person responsible for your income at the end of your term, etc. They tend to move left, rather than right.

[old guy]

3. No one should be appointed for life for anything.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. And that's exactly why it was set up that way in the first place.

[stillcool]

5. they can't be bribed?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

6. Occasionally they have been; a few federal judges were impeached for bribery.

[TexasBushwhacker]

7. And that's why Roberts has become a swing vote

He's more concerned about his legacy than any perceived duty to a political party.

[Nictuku]

8. You are correct

THE MOST IMPORTANT issue for Article III Judges is to maintain the Independence of the Judiciary.