I’m less for term limits and more for age limits. At some point between 65-72 they get booted off the bench.
Honestly, though, it is unlikely either term limits or age limits would prevent shitstains like Thomas and Alito from being on the bench. They’ve been there and been shitstains this whole time. Now they’re enjoying an uncontested majority that agrees with them, that’s all that has really changed.
Term limits are more important. I’m all for age limits, too, but term limits are more important,
It’d absolutely suck to have a life time appointment given to an asshole- an asshole who would be in office for 40 years because he was appointed straight out of law school.
I’m would suggest setting up a rotation that sees one judge go per year…. Let’s set it in June… so that the incoming president has a few months to get people….
This gives them a 9 year term. Remember, they’re supposed to be established judges so by then they’d be at retirement anyhow…
The rotating retirement is good because it gives a known number of appointments I’m each set timeframe. I would change it to 18 years so that it is every other year, otherwise a 2 term president could appoint 8/9 justices and dominate the court
This is such a spurious connection lol but I read the article anyway
The pattern probably emerged as a result of Darwinian natural selection: cicadas that naturally matured in easily divisible years were gobbled up by predators, and simply didn’t live long enough to produce as many offspring. Those who, by chance, had long, prime-numbered life spans fared best, survived longest, and left the most offspring, becoming the dominant variation of the species.
I’m glad the author actually took the time to describe the evolutionary process accurately. When I was an impressionable youngin’ arguing against evolution, a big sticking point for me was how so many people described evolution as if there was some design or guidance behind it all. Nope, just common sense chaos and lots of death
Yes, I too get annoyed when evolution is described as an active process, e.g. “evolution got us to have legs to walk”, rather than a passive selection process “evolution means that those early humans that walked were better able to successfully procreate”.
It is noteworthy to me that a prime number based length of tenure might then cause the fewest number of retirements at the same time, over time.
This is definitely the better solution. We don’t need the court experiencing major political swings during nearly every presidency.
Edit: Also, the chief justice should either be chosen amongst themselves or be the longest serving member, not randomly chosen when that spot opens.
While I am thinking about it. if we really want to depoliticize the position, as much as possible, we should consider making them lifetime public citizens after they join the court. By public citizen, I mean they become wards of the nation and can no longer make or posses money or assets. They must divest all assets to family and will be provided food, lodging, and stipends for travel or leisure for the rest of their lives. After they retire they will become Justices Emeriti who should guest lecture at various law schools and may be called in to advise or assist the sitting court when particularly complex issues arise. Any money made by a Justice Emeritus should be funneled into the cost of providing for all the Justice Emeritus.
Term limits but no age limit means we’ll still have old out of touch justices.
What would work best is if we treated SC like a rotation, do your 5-10 or whatever years, then rotate back to a lower court if your still under an age.
There should be mandatory retirement ages, because power hungry people never step down voluntarily.
And the way it’s currently structured, a president will appoint someone that will stay in the longest. That’s why Republicans are nominating you inexperienced judges who will be there for 30 years.
I’d be more for capability limits? What happens if life extension comes along and we are frozen in the past (just like we are right now with things like EC and the way in which California is underrepresented with only 2 senators, WTF) with really stupid and outmoded rules?
I’m less for term limits and more for age limits. At some point between 65-72 they get booted off the bench.
Honestly, though, it is unlikely either term limits or age limits would prevent shitstains like Thomas and Alito from being on the bench. They’ve been there and been shitstains this whole time. Now they’re enjoying an uncontested majority that agrees with them, that’s all that has really changed.
Term limits are more important. I’m all for age limits, too, but term limits are more important,
It’d absolutely suck to have a life time appointment given to an asshole- an asshole who would be in office for 40 years because he was appointed straight out of law school.
I’m would suggest setting up a rotation that sees one judge go per year…. Let’s set it in June… so that the incoming president has a few months to get people….
This gives them a 9 year term. Remember, they’re supposed to be established judges so by then they’d be at retirement anyhow…
The rotating retirement is good because it gives a known number of appointments I’m each set timeframe. I would change it to 18 years so that it is every other year, otherwise a 2 term president could appoint 8/9 justices and dominate the court
A prime number might be better, as shown by cicadas
This is such a spurious connection lol but I read the article anyway
I’m glad the author actually took the time to describe the evolutionary process accurately. When I was an impressionable youngin’ arguing against evolution, a big sticking point for me was how so many people described evolution as if there was some design or guidance behind it all. Nope, just common sense chaos and lots of death
Yes, I too get annoyed when evolution is described as an active process, e.g. “evolution got us to have legs to walk”, rather than a passive selection process “evolution means that those early humans that walked were better able to successfully procreate”.
It is noteworthy to me that a prime number based length of tenure might then cause the fewest number of retirements at the same time, over time.
This is definitely the better solution. We don’t need the court experiencing major political swings during nearly every presidency.
Edit: Also, the chief justice should either be chosen amongst themselves or be the longest serving member, not randomly chosen when that spot opens.
While I am thinking about it. if we really want to depoliticize the position, as much as possible, we should consider making them lifetime public citizens after they join the court. By public citizen, I mean they become wards of the nation and can no longer make or posses money or assets. They must divest all assets to family and will be provided food, lodging, and stipends for travel or leisure for the rest of their lives. After they retire they will become Justices Emeriti who should guest lecture at various law schools and may be called in to advise or assist the sitting court when particularly complex issues arise. Any money made by a Justice Emeritus should be funneled into the cost of providing for all the Justice Emeritus.
Term limits but no age limit means we’ll still have old out of touch justices.
What would work best is if we treated SC like a rotation, do your 5-10 or whatever years, then rotate back to a lower court if your still under an age.
There should be mandatory retirement ages, because power hungry people never step down voluntarily.
And the way it’s currently structured, a president will appoint someone that will stay in the longest. That’s why Republicans are nominating you inexperienced judges who will be there for 30 years.
What if life extension radically alters what is thought of as “old”?
Then we should celebrate that, and re-calibrate accordingly
We can cross that bridge when we get there
I’d be more for capability limits? What happens if life extension comes along and we are frozen in the past (just like we are right now with things like EC and the way in which California is underrepresented with only 2 senators, WTF) with really stupid and outmoded rules?