Republicans say there's not way to confirm a Justice before the elections and point to an unwritten rule saying there is not enough time. Democrats say there is plenty of time.
Is there enough time or not? Well first of all, time is not the true issue here. If the situation were reversed with a Republican in the White House, I'm sure the positions of the Dems and the GOP would be reversed. It's politics.
A Constitutional Amendment creating 18-year terms staggered every 2 years, so that each of the nine Justices would be replaced in order of seniority every other year. This would be a prospective proposal, and would be applied to future judges only. Doing this would move the court closer to the people by ensuring that every President would have the opportunity to replace two Justices per term, and that no court could stretch its ideology over multiple generations. Further, this reform would maintain judicial independence, but instill regularity to the nominations process, discourage Justices from choosing a retirement date based on politics, and will stop the ever-increasing tenure of Justices.
I'm surprised this idea doesn't get more traction.
"The great problem of any civilization is how to rejuvenate itself without rebarbarization." - Will Durant "We've kept more promises than we've even made" - Donald Trump "Of what meaning is the world without mind? The question cannot exist." - Edwin Land
MeDotOrg wrote:Republicans say there's not way to confirm a Justice before the elections and point to an unwritten rule saying there is not enough time. Democrats say there is plenty of time.
Is there enough time or not? Well first of all, time is not the true issue here. If the situation were reversed with a Republican in the White House, I'm sure the positions of the Democrats and the GOP would be reversed. It's politics.
A Constitutional Amendment creating 18-year terms staggered every 2 years, so that each of the nine Justices would be replaced in order of seniority every other year. This would be a prospective proposal, and would be applied to future judges only. Doing this would move the court closer to the people by ensuring that every President would have the opportunity to replace two Justices per term, and that no court could stretch its ideology over multiple generations. Further, this reform would maintain judicial independence, but instill regularity to the nominations process, discourage Justices from choosing a retirement date based on politics, and will stop the ever-increasing tenure of Justices.
I'm surprised this idea doesn't get more traction.
That's actually a really solid proposal. I wonder if it would have an effect on the court's tempo?
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
I actually might agree to that as well. The current system keeps the court a long way behind the times. I think 18 years is plenty of time. If the people continue to choose evil, let it burn.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
If the situation were reversed with a Republican in the White House, I'm sure the positions of the Democrats and the GOP would be reversed. It's politics.
I actually doubt that in this case. I think this is attempting to project fairness through false balance.
I favor 20 year term limits for federal judges. (Also, 12 years for Senators and 8 years for Representatives.)
I'm pretty sure term limits could just as easily politicize court appointments further. When you know who is going to retire and when, it makes it much easier to game-plan replacements and have anxiety about your side not winning. You can run an election on that. Right now, uncertainty can just as easily be suppressing political theater over the nomination process as it might be inflaming it.
MeDotOrg wrote: I'm surprised this idea doesn't get more traction.
You are surprised that term limits didn't gain political traction?
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
The proposed amendment doesn't suggest electing the Supreme Court Justices by popular election--only limiting their terms of office, and giving every sitting president a shot at appointing new justices. I think the idea has some merit.
No precept or claim is more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
“If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.”
― Harlan Ellison
The proposed amendment doesn't suggest electing the Supreme Court Justices by popular election--only limiting their terms of office, and giving every sitting president a shot at appointing new justices. I think the idea has some merit.
As Justice Scalia has shown there are term limits right now. I don't see where giving any President more power over Federal Judgeship's will make the situation better.
The problem with the Court and politics is as always Liberalism. Liberals don't want to follow the law and the constitution, while conservatives justices are the only ones left who do. Leftists think that whatever pet ideology they have is good is the same thing as good law, when it's not.
Just look at the recent gun cases the Supreme Court has handled. The leftist judges actually VOTED AGAINST the Constitutional and Human Natural Rights of Americans. And it was only the remaining and dominant Conservative justices being the majority that stopped their Leftist Fascism against the people.
As to "term limits"... I'm very much for them in ALL political and government positions. It would greatly help eliminate corruption, and abuse of power. As an example, no elected or government official should be allowed to serve more than two 4 year terms together, and then they must leave. They CAN come back and serve if they are really wanted, and as many times as wanted, but they must not serve for one term, and can only serve for two consecutive terms. This is how it should be for President, the Supreme Court, or any Federal Government position. This country is being corrupted because liberals are gaining more and more power and are using and abusing that power in ways that this country was not founded on. If officials are held accountable by the people more, this corruption and abuse of power would occur much less.
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro