This article is news with liberal commentary.
Some Democrats want to change the Supreme Court’s lifetime tenure to 18 years. Under this scheme, every president would appoint 2 justices in a 4-year term, so a two-term president would appoint a total of 4 justices.
“It would save the country a lot of agony and help lower the temperature over fights for the court that go to the fault lines of cultural issues and is one of the primary things tearing at our social fabric,” Ro Khanna (D-CA) says.
I’m thinking it also would encourage appointing older, more experienced judges. Amy Coney Barrett, Trump’s expected pick to replace Ginsburg, is 48 and her youth is one of Trump’s primary motivations for picking her; she potentially could hold that seat for conservatives for 40 years. If the Democratic bill passes, she would have to retire at 66; a justice appointed at age 60 would be out at 78.
The turnover would also give voters a more direct say over who’s on the court, because they would be choosing which party will appoint 2 of the justices in every presidential election.
Many legal scholars support term-limiting justices, and the public does too, according to polls. However, some argue the Constitution would have to be amended, an unlikely prospect.
Read story here.
Yes the constitution would have to be amended. This is an issue that was discussed by the founders.
The process to choose federal judges is indirect and not democratic. It is meant to insulate judges from what the founders felt was the hurley burley of politics.
Notice how our democratic friends are not suggesting direct election of federal judges. Of course that would require all kinds of changes to the constitution and the Federal government getting fully into the election business.
So why not elect judges. I think it would be a bad idea and a lot of these Democrats pushing all this stuff do as well. They will not admit that the choosing of federal judges is non-democratic and that it is a good thing. It has served our nation well since the constitution was passed by 11 states.
The Constitution only says judges “shall hold their Offices during Good behavior,” whatever that means. “Historical practice indicates an understanding that the Good Behavior Clause protects federal judges from removal for congressional disagreement with legal or political opinions.” (https://tinyurl.com/y69gtzce) Under that interpretation, the Constitution is silent about whether Congress can establish judicial terms of office by statute, which means it can.