Term Limits?
-
wrote on 25 Sept 2020, 12:23 last edited by Loki
Whatever.
Actually quid pro quo, you get term limits too.
-
wrote on 25 Sept 2020, 12:24 last edited by
Good luck with that.
-
wrote on 25 Sept 2020, 12:37 last edited by
Kabuki.`
-
wrote on 25 Sept 2020, 12:53 last edited by
Doesn't sound like a stupid idea. Maybe there should also be an age limit. People are usually not mentally in their prime when they pass 80 or so.
-
Doesn't sound like a stupid idea. Maybe there should also be an age limit. People are usually not mentally in their prime when they pass 80 or so.
wrote on 25 Sept 2020, 13:25 last edited by@Klaus said in Term Limits?:
Doesn't sound like a stupid idea. Maybe there should also be an age limit. People are usually not mentally in their prime when they pass 80 or so.
I don't dispute the validity of the idea. The problem is that life terms are embedded into the Constitution for these positions, and changing it is a very, very heavy lift.
-
wrote on 25 Sept 2020, 13:27 last edited by
We should reform the court, assuming the republic lasts.
The best way to do it is a bipartisan+ commission writing rules that take effect in 2045 or something, so that people can look beyond getting/giving up advantage and just implement something that makes sense.
I say bipartisan+ because I wouldn't want parties to be written in to the reform, as some proposals have suggested.
-
@Klaus said in Term Limits?:
Doesn't sound like a stupid idea. Maybe there should also be an age limit. People are usually not mentally in their prime when they pass 80 or so.
I don't dispute the validity of the idea. The problem is that life terms are embedded into the Constitution for these positions, and changing it is a very, very heavy lift.
wrote on 25 Sept 2020, 14:07 last edited by taiwan_girl@George-K said in Term Limits?:
@Klaus said in Term Limits?:
Doesn't sound like a stupid idea. Maybe there should also be an age limit. People are usually not mentally in their prime when they pass 80 or so.
I don't dispute the validity of the idea. The problem is that life terms are embedded into the Constitution for these positions, and changing it is a very, very heavy lift.
I am not sure about that.
“ It is interesting to note that the Constitution does not specify the number of justices that there should be on the Supreme Court. The text also does not specify term limits or that the positions last until a person’s death or retirement. Instead, article 3 only says that the Supreme Court judges are required to hold their offices in “good behaviour,” which implies that a judge could be removed for unlawful activity. ”
Don’t know if there should be term limits but do think there should be an age limit.
-
wrote on 25 Sept 2020, 15:34 last edited by
Justices on SCOTUS can be impeached and removed by Congress, of course. But, according to Article III, that's the ONLY reason for a justice leaving the court (involuntarily, that is). But, there are no age limits, or term limits, specified.
Washington's Justice Samuel Chase was impeached, but he was acquitted.
-
wrote on 25 Sept 2020, 19:00 last edited by
Ain't gonna happen.
