Re: We're so f*cked
Posted: Mon May 01, 2017 2:26 pmwell it went nuclear so i guess we won't have this problem going forward. you can thank the republicans for that
i think the stakes are too high with lifelong terms, because it's something that lasts so long and has such an impact for generations. i think the supreme court needs to have regulated replacement (with death being exception, not the rule). these judges will be well respected and make plenty of money in retirement after court. i don't think they need term limits though... they can be 8 times a judge of the 20 year terms if they get 8 different presidents to nominate them over 160 years, i don't care. the problem is that life expectancy is so high and the physical demands of the job so low (they are in session like a couple months out of a year? f**k.) that no one retires. this is the opposite of how the founders had it. until 1891, SCOTUS members had to ride the circuit (on horseback, likely, or perhaps stagecoach or train depending on the part of the country (this function of riding the circuit is where the term "circuit court" comes from)) of the entire united states to hear intermediate appeals in addition to their caseload in Washington. this kind of strenuous activity made it so justices retired after around 7 years. now, it's basically retirement from the start of becoming a supreme court judge, but a retirement where you get to play god and destroy the work of elected officials and have no consequences for any of your actions