Skip to main content

View Diary: If the President Had Done What SCOTUS Just Did with Partisan VRA Ruling (37 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And let's insist on a de facto age minimum (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    postalblue, slowbutsure

    for Supreme Court Justices so we're not saddled with them for eternity.

    But first, let's hold the crooks on the Court to account and restore some semblance of law to it.

    Sign the petition to demand a law-abiding Supreme Court.

    by Troubadour on Thu Jun 27, 2013 at 01:26:09 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  how about... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Troubadour, slowbutsure, phonegery, Chi

      ...a single ten year term for all federal judges?

      •  agree... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Troubadour, slowbutsure, phonegery

        ...on age and accountability.

      •  Twenty is fine for SCOTUS. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        slowbutsure

        Sign the petition to demand a law-abiding Supreme Court.

        by Troubadour on Thu Jun 27, 2013 at 01:32:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I think having an experienced federal bench is (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Troubadour, FG, terrypinder

        important, but I like 18 year term limits for members of the SCOTUS an idea that has bipartisan support. If we did it right, in time, a new member would join every two years. It would take a Constitutional Amendment, and the present Court would be grandfathered, but I like the idea a lot.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Thu Jun 27, 2013 at 01:59:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  California SC justices (0+ / 0-)

        have a 9 year term.  NY Supreme Court (and this is actually the state's LOWEST court) justices have 14 year terms.  How about 15 year terms for SCOTUS justices?  Subject to confirmation, of course, and allowed ONE reappointment and reconfirmation by the President and the Senate.  Under this system, yes, Rehnquist and Scalia could have been reappointed in 2001 by Bush, but O'Connor, whose 15 year term would have ended in 1996, would probably have not been reappointed by Clinton.

        Also, there are minimum ages for congress (25), Senate (30), and President (35) to try and ensure the holder has at least some experience and maturity.  So, given long life expectancies these days, why not 57 for SCOTUS justices?

        "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

        by TLS66 on Thu Jun 27, 2013 at 10:43:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site