View Poll Results: Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

Voters
33. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, our present system works as intended.

    15 45.45%
  • No, they should have limited terms, then replaced.

    7 21.21%
  • No, they should have limited terms, but be allowed to be re-confirmed.

    9 27.27%
  • No, "unlimited" terms, but an easier process for removal.

    0 0%
  • No, just no. (Please elaborate)

    1 3.03%
  • Not sure.

    1 3.03%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

  1. #1
    Phonetic Mnemonic ©
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:00 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,397

    Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

    Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

    Yes, our present system works as intended.
    No, they should have limited terms, then replaced.
    No, they should have limited terms, but be allowed to be re-confirmed.
    No, "unlimited" terms, but an easier process for removal.
    No, just no. (Please elaborate)
    Not sure.

    Note: SC = (US) Supreme Court
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  2. #2
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,064

    Re: Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

    there are a few justices who i disagree with consistently, but i'm ok with the current setup. i'd rather see the partisan duopoly eliminated.

  3. #3
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,175

    Re: Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

    The current system is fine - the only alternative is to leave it to a vote of the electorate which would be a popularity disaster.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  4. #4
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Anagram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    St. Louis MO
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    6,164

    Re: Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    The current system is fine - the only alternative is to leave it to a vote of the electorate which would be a popularity disaster.
    Not necessarily the only alternative. You could have their terms expire and just have the executive appoint the replacement. I'm not sure that's any better than the current system either though.
    There should be Instant Runoff Voting

  5. #5
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

    Re: Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

    I said "no just no" and had a thought that maybe we should elect justices by region. Each the regions below could elect one justice.



    Except Colorado should be in the green and Alaska in the red.

    Just an idea.

  6. #6
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,561

    Re: Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

    Yes, our present system works as intended.
    No, they should have limited terms, then replaced.
    No, they should have limited terms, but be allowed to be re-confirmed.
    No, "unlimited" terms, but an easier process for removal.
    No, just no. (Please elaborate)
    Not sure.

    Note: SC = (US) Supreme Court
    I believe in a set term of say 15 years or 70 years of age-whatever comes first and that is it

    they would be just as immune to the pressures of running for office but we wouldn't have senile judges on the court such as the late Thurgood Marshall or Stevens-both of whom were getting pretty loopy their last few years on the bench



  7. #7
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

    In the military, the oldest statutory age for retirement is 66. I think that our elected offices should have age limits rather than term limits, and that 66 should be that limit.

    I have no problem with Supreme Court Justices having a mandatory retirement once they reach the age of 66.
    Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.

  8. #8
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    I believe in a set term of say 15 years or 70 years of age-whatever comes first and that is it

    they would be just as immune to the pressures of running for office but we wouldn't have senile judges on the court such as the late Thurgood Marshall or Stevens-both of whom were getting pretty loopy their last few years on the bench
    Agreed. The method for choosing justices is fine just as it is, but as lifetimes get longer, a few people are spending too long in the position. And having a court that is statistically older and older stagnates opinions and puts the court farther from the pulse of the people.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  9. #9
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,561

    Re: Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Agreed. The method for choosing justices is fine just as it is, but as lifetimes get longer, a few people are spending too long in the position. And having a court that is statistically older and older stagnates opinions and puts the court farther from the pulse of the people.
    Federal civilian law enforcement officers (FBI, DEA, USMS, F&WS, IRS-CID) have a mandatory retirement of 57 (which can be extended in special circumstances up to 60). This 57 year old age limit has been upheld dozens of times in court. Now Judges should be able to go more years. . And yes, I know a judge who still serves far past that date and is an excellent judge. just as there are men at 65 who are probably much fitter and agile than me at 54.



  10. #10
    Discount Philosopher
    specklebang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Last Seen
    06-05-14 @ 08:26 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,524

    Re: Should we continue to appoint SC Justices for life?

    Since our SCOTUS judges are so blatantly partisan, we should be grateful that things haven't gotten much worse. Imagine a world where all the justices were appointed by Bush or Obama.

    Of all the positions, I would hope these justices were decided by a Meritocracy instead of our "Democracy".

    Breyer, Ginsburg, Scalia and Kennedy are getting pretty old. So, I expect to see a retirement on the left pretty soon, while Obama is still King. Scalia is stuck until the next GOP President.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •