Discussion (7)
Grab this poll for your site
Votes cast anywhere this poll is embedded count toward the same live total.
From Groundbeat
Help us build thisWe're building the Groundbeat community one person at a time, and we need your help — if you know someone who belongs here, please send them groundbeat.com.
More in News & Politics
- Was a federal appeals court right to rule that President Trump exceeded his authority by federalizing California's National Guard? · 3 votes
- Should President Trump move White House reporters out of the press briefing room? · 2 votes
- Should former presidents like Barack Obama actively campaign in the midterm elections? · 3 votes
- Is Israel right to demolish Palestinian homes in the occupied West Bank after a deadly shooting there? · 3 votes
The unpredictability of when terms will end due to death and health coupled with the ability to hold out and step down at the, "right", time for a justices political reasons has lead in part to th mess we are in today. I would prefer the end date of a justices term was well understood and predictable up front.
The Supreme Court is the branch furthest from the people, in fact it has no connection to the people whatsoever. The Supreme Court system should be completely revamped by Constitutional amendment including term limits and a direct and clean path to remove sitting justices. This is supposed to be a government "of, by, and for the people."
I've said it before, I'll say it again: THANKS FOR LESS THAN NOTHING, ALEXANDER HAMILTON.
Let's just stick to the Constitution: they “shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour”. We should never deviate from that foundational guidance lightly.
James Madison's guidance, yes; Alexander Hamilton's guidance, hell no.
That's nonsense. Fixed terms are a much superior idea. How long you manage to stay alive should have zero to do with how long you can serve in a public office. Back when life expectancy was 50-60 years, it was less of an issue. Nowadays, people can exist into their 90s quite easily. That is absurd for a justice or any judge. I support VERY long terms, up to 20 years, but always fixed, nothing that can be "forever".
Very long terms is an interesting idea. It looks like the average tenure of a Supreme Court justice over the last 50 years is about 26 years, so the impact of a 20-year term might not be that great. Is it worth deviating from the Constitution for that?