General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsInitiative Aims to End U.S. Supreme Court Justices’ Life Tenure
Brennan Center
Initiative Aims to End U.S. Supreme Court Justices Life Tenure
Come to Terms, a new initiative launched Wednesday http://www.brennancenter.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=82365&qid=5139740 by the watchdog organization Fix the Court, http://www.brennancenter.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=82366&qid=5139740 aims to replace the system of lifetime tenure for justices of the U.S. Supreme Court with a single, fixed term of 18 years. The current system of lifetime appointments and sporadic retirements is broken and a far cry from its original intent, said Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court, in a press release. http://www.brennancenter.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=82367&qid=5139740 Lifetime appointments were supposed to shield Supreme Court justices from the influence of partisan politics. Instead, under Chief Justice John Roberts, we have a court with the most 5-4 decisions in our nations history. The initiative claims the proposal is supported by two-thirds of American primary voters across party lines, as well as by a broad coalition of constitutional scholars and legal experts. Come to Terms is gathering signatures for a petition calling on the next justice appointed to the court to pledge not to serve longer than 18 years.
samsingh
(17,571 posts)ways
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Good luck with that.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)"The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour"
As long as they aren't impeached or criminally prosecuted (section 2 of Article III), there is nothing else listed about removal from office. To turn over the precedent started in 1801 (with John Marshall, the 4th chief justice), IMHO, would require a constitutional amendment (or for the court to side against said precedent, but I don't see that happening).
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)Kennedy would side with he left wing of the court, and the left wing would go with it IF it didn't apply to current appointees.
clarice
(5,504 posts)SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)would be to have MORE justices....21 sounds good to me .. It would take a vote of 11 to TAKE a case..and then a random selection of which 9 would rule would prevent a LOT of frivolous political choices
I would also like to see term limits for senators/congresscritters as well.. We apparently can no longer trust the people will do their homework..and we are getting waaaay too many automatic re-elects of jackasses.. 2 6 year terms for senate..2 4 yr terms for congress
and while we're at it, why not just make the presidency a 1 term..7 years....but after a break in service they could be re-elected.. Presidents who serve two terms always have "a lost year".. the year before their re-election ... By not having to waste time, energy and money trying to stay in office, they could concentrate on getting things done.,
alongside the term limits would be a rule that the expired terms mean they have to go back where they claim to be from (like they want immigrants to do), and stay out of DC for 5 years before they decide to become a lobbyist.. By then, their "pull" should have lessened.