|
|
Post by aj2hall on Apr 9, 2021 19:28:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by birukitty on Apr 9, 2021 19:49:30 GMT
That's wonderful! I always thought the lifetime appointments were ridiculous. They need to have term appointments.
|
|
|
|
Post by kibblesandbits on Apr 9, 2021 19:56:33 GMT
That's wonderful! I always thought the lifetime appointments were ridiculous. They need to have term appointments. Ideally, lifetime appointments removed the seated judge from the pressures and inherent favor currying needed to continue serving. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 16:49:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2021 20:01:59 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by littlemama on Apr 9, 2021 20:21:02 GMT
That's wonderful! I always thought the lifetime appointments were ridiculous. They need to have term appointments. Ideally, lifetime appointments removed the seated judge from the pressures and inherent favor currying needed to continue serving. I think it should be a single, limited term, say 10 years. |
|
|
|
Post by kibblesandbits on Apr 9, 2021 20:23:48 GMT
Ideally, lifetime appointments removed the seated judge from the pressures and inherent favor currying needed to continue serving. I think it should be a single, limited term, say 10 years. Perhaps, but limited terms only increase the opportunity for partisan appointments. Ideally, the changes considered should be ones the limit the types of shenanigans we have seen in recent years regarding the appointment process. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Apr 9, 2021 20:23:48 GMT
I don't think the framers of the constitution envisioned lifetime appointments lasting 50 plus years. Several recent judges were appointed in their 40's. Regrettably, I think we will be stuck with Clarence Thomas for a long time. I'm open to the idea of a long term, maybe even up to 20 or 25 years. 40-50 years just seems excessive and gives an individual justice way more power than I think the framers originally intended.
|
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 9, 2021 20:46:02 GMT
I like the idea. I do think that SC Justices should step down at some point.
|
|
|
|
Post by kibblesandbits on Apr 9, 2021 20:48:46 GMT
I like the idea. I do think that SC Justices should step down at some point. They can step down, any timE they like. |
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 9, 2021 20:51:14 GMT
I like the idea. I do think that SC Justices should step down at some point. They can step down, any timE they like. I should be clearer. I think that there should be a mandatory age retirement. |
|
|
|
Post by kibblesandbits on Apr 9, 2021 20:54:05 GMT
They can step down, any timE they like. I should be clearer. I think that there should be a mandatory age retirement. But why? Why should they be forced out at a certain age if they are still able and passionate enough to perform their duties? Did people really have concerns about RBG’s capabilities in her advanced age and physical health? |
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 9, 2021 21:13:01 GMT
I should be clearer. I think that there should be a mandatory age retirement. But why? Why should they be forced out at a certain age if they are still able and passionate enough to perform their duties? Did people really have concerns about RBG’s capabilities in her advanced age and physical health? Yes, I think that they should have to retire at a certain point. For a variety of reasons. Bottom line, I don’t see why someone needs to be an 80 year old SC Justice. Hand it off to someone younger. And I say that as a senior who has retired. |
|
|
|
Post by kibblesandbits on Apr 9, 2021 21:37:19 GMT
But why? Why should they be forced out at a certain age if they are still able and passionate enough to perform their duties? Did people really have concerns about RBG’s capabilities in her advanced age and physical health? Yes, I think that they should have to retire at a certain point. For a variety of reasons. Bottom line, I don’t see why someone needs to be an 80 year old SC Justice. Hand it off to someone younger. And I say that as a senior who has retired. Were you forced to retire? Not badgering, promise. Just wondering why one would have to step down at a predetermined age? |
|
Olan
Pearl Clutcher
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,050 
|
Post by Olan on Apr 9, 2021 21:42:38 GMT
Because they are old and now it’s time to rest relax or whatever.
Because it gives someone else a chance.
Because it’s the right thing to do.
Because a 30 yr old brain and a 80 yr old brain are two different bags.
|
|
|
|
Post by flanz on Apr 9, 2021 21:58:46 GMT
And whatever happened to the concept of IMPARTIAL justices, not tied to any political dogma???
I am hoping for true reform that will result in a fair system, whatever that might look like.
I think the tweet posted here by @freddie is apt.
|
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 9, 2021 22:08:22 GMT
Yes, I think that they should have to retire at a certain point. For a variety of reasons. Bottom line, I don’t see why someone needs to be an 80 year old SC Justice. Hand it off to someone younger. And I say that as a senior who has retired. Were you forced to retire? Not badgering, promise. Just wondering why one would have to step down at a predetermined age? No, but then again I don’t decide complex cases that affect millions of citizens. Look, I think that it is perfectly fair to ask someone to step down at a certain age-say, 75 for the sake of argument. |
|
|
|
Post by kibblesandbits on Apr 9, 2021 22:23:05 GMT
And whatever happened to the concept of IMPARTIAL justices, not tied to any political dogma??? I am hoping for true reform that will result in a fair system, whatever that might look like. I think the tweet posted here by @freddie is apt. Well, yes but that’s an issue with the electroral system, not the SC. |
|
lindas
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,275
|
Post by lindas on Apr 9, 2021 22:27:00 GMT
But why? Why should they be forced out at a certain age if they are still able and passionate enough to perform their duties? Did people really have concerns about RBG’s capabilities in her advanced age and physical health? Yes, I think that they should have to retire at a certain point. For a variety of reasons. Bottom line, I don’t see why someone needs to be an 80 year old SC Justice. Hand it off to someone younger. And I say that as a senior who has retired. I agree and since we can’t get term limits on the house and senate they should also have a mandatory retirement age too. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Apr 9, 2021 22:29:03 GMT
Yes, I think that they should have to retire at a certain point. For a variety of reasons. Bottom line, I don’t see why someone needs to be an 80 year old SC Justice. Hand it off to someone younger. And I say that as a senior who has retired. I agree and since we can’t get term limits on the house and senate they should also have a mandatory retirement age too. For once, I actually agree with you. |
|
|
|
Post by epeanymous on Apr 9, 2021 22:34:05 GMT
There are some great folks on that list, but I will say that it is a conservative (I don’t mean politically conservative) group.
|
|
|
|
Post by kibblesandbits on Apr 9, 2021 22:34:11 GMT
Were you forced to retire? Not badgering, promise. Just wondering why one would have to step down at a predetermined age? No, but then again I don’t decide complex cases that affect millions of citizens. Look, I think that it is perfectly fair to ask someone to step down at a certain age-say, 75 for the sake of argument. I think then, with the age of appointees younger and younger, perhaps a term limit should be enforced rather than an age limit (which is a civil rights issue all on its own lol). A set Humber of years of service, with openings staggered. |
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 9, 2021 22:37:33 GMT
No, but then again I don’t decide complex cases that affect millions of citizens. Look, I think that it is perfectly fair to ask someone to step down at a certain age-say, 75 for the sake of argument. I think then, with the age of appointees younger and younger, perhaps a term limit should be enforced rather than an age limit (which is a civil rights issue all on its own lol). A set Humber of years of service, with openings staggered. Fair. This is one of the areas that I think the commission will look into. Age or length of term? I am against lifetime appointments in general. |
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 9, 2021 22:38:40 GMT
Yes, I think that they should have to retire at a certain point. For a variety of reasons. Bottom line, I don’t see why someone needs to be an 80 year old SC Justice. Hand it off to someone younger. And I say that as a senior who has retired. I agree and since we can’t get term limits on the house and senate they should also have a mandatory retirement age too. Agreed. We need to mark this date on a calendar.  |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Apr 9, 2021 22:45:02 GMT
I think a term limit (and long one) might be more appropriate than a forced retirement age. I think there's already been way too much of a push to appoint younger and younger judges so that they can stay on the bench a long time, versus finding the BEST judge with appropriate experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by epeanymous on Apr 9, 2021 22:53:57 GMT
I think a term limit (and long one) might be more appropriate than a forced retirement age. I think there's already been way too much of a push to appoint younger and younger judges so that they can stay on the bench a long time, versus finding the BEST judge with appropriate experience. A possibility would be defined, staggered terms such that, eg, a new justice would be appointed every 2 or 4 years, meaning that each president would get some chance to shape the court, and that there would be less emphasis on finding the youngest humans possible (I think it might make sense to do something similar for federal district and appellate courts). I mean, don’t get me wrong — I think that the judicial appointment system where you encourage presidents to appoint 65-year-olds on the edge of retirement to judgeships as rewards for campaign donations or as career capstones for people past the prime of their careers isn’t awesome either, but the trend towards putting people who literally have never tried a case on the federal bench in their 30s so they can plausibly be appointed to the Supreme Court at 42 is ludicrous. |
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 9, 2021 22:58:27 GMT
I think a term limit (and long one) might be more appropriate than a forced retirement age. I think there's already been way too much of a push to appoint younger and younger judges so that they can stay on the bench a long time, versus finding the BEST judge with appropriate experience. That’s an excellent point. |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Apr 9, 2021 23:30:32 GMT
Mitch McConnell Blows A Gasket Over Biden Potentially Adding More Supreme Court JusticesFRI, APR 9TH, 2021 BY JASON EASLEY McConnell said in part, “So anyone who was surprised by the creation of a commission on packing the Supreme Court simply hasn’t been paying attention. This faux-academic study of a nonexistent problem fits squarely within liberals’ years-long campaign to politicize the Court, intimidate its members, and subvert its independence. This is not some new, serious, or sober pivot away from Democrats’ political attacks on the Court. It’s just an attempt to clothe those ongoing attacks in fake legitimacy. It’s disappointing that anyone, liberal or conservative, would lend credence to this attack by participating in the commission.” It is as if Mitch McConnell doesn’t think the American people will notice that he spent the entire Trump administration packing the courts with partisans in order to politicize the Judicial Branch. ** www.politicususa.com/2021/04/09/mitch-mcconnell-biden-supreme-court.html
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Apr 10, 2021 0:05:34 GMT
The non existent problem is only for McConnell. He likes the current system, he was able to block Merrick Garland’s nomination and ram through ACB’s nomination. Not to mention all of the judicial appointments that he withheld during the Obama administration and then happily filled those positions during formers administration.
|
|
|
|
Post by mom on Apr 10, 2021 1:35:07 GMT
No, but then again I don’t decide complex cases that affect millions of citizens. Look, I think that it is perfectly fair to ask someone to step down at a certain age-say, 75 for the sake of argument.
I could get behind this. |
|
tracylynn
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,899
|
Post by tracylynn on Apr 10, 2021 2:07:32 GMT
No, but then again I don’t decide complex cases that affect millions of citizens. Look, I think that it is perfectly fair to ask someone to step down at a certain age-say, 75 for the sake of argument. I think then, with the age of appointees younger and younger, perhaps a term limit should be enforced rather than an age limit (which is a civil rights issue all on its own lol). A set Humber of years of service, with openings staggered. Lots of places have forced age retirements. I don't think putting one on Scotus is unreasonable. I prefer term limits, maybe 10-20 years. I also think they should be staggered to try and limit to 1-2 in any 4 year Presidential term. Of course, there could be emergency appts due to illness or death, you can't control those. |
|
