Rye Catcher
Platinum Member
- Nov 21, 2019
- 12,780
- 7,609
- 940
- Banned
- #61
House Democrats are planning to introduce a bill next week that would limit the terms of Supreme Court justices to 18 years instead of their current lifetime tenure, just as President Trump prepares to announce a nominee to fill the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat.
The bill, the Supreme Court Term Limits and Regular Appointments Act, was spearheaded by lead sponsor Representative Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, who is expected to introduce the bill next week, along with cosponsors Representatives Joe Kennedy III and Don Beyer.
“It would save the country a lot of agony and help lower the temperature over fights for the court that go to the fault lines of cultural issues and is one of the primary things tearing at our social fabric,” Khanna said in a statement. [Me: As if they gave a damn about our agony]
He added in a tweet that, “Every president should have an equal chance to appoint justices. Our entire democratic system shouldn’t hinge on the shoulders of individual Supreme Court justices.”
The bill would also cap the number of justices a president could nominate to two per term. It would also not apply to current Supreme Court justices.
The Constitution states that justices “shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour.” The Democratic legislation, details of which are expected to be revealed on Friday, would attempt to comply with the Constitution by relegating justices to lower courts after 18 years on the Supreme Court.
Democrats to Propose Bill Limiting Supreme Court Justice Terms to 18 Years | National Review
House Democrats are planning to introduce a bill next week.www.nationalreview.com
Idle thought: would the Dems be doing this if they thought Biden was going to be elected? Doubt it.
Here's the problem with that bill: Whatever this Congress does can be undone by a future Congress. So, once a democrat is elected the the WH and the democrats assume a Senate majority, they can appoint their justices and once the SCOTUS leans left they can pass an new bill that changes the tenure back to a lifetime appointment. You tell me - would the democrats do that if the President was a democrat? I think so.
That said, there's a few things I would change in this bill. Instead of limiting the terms I would require a reconfirmation, if reconfirmed a justice could serve another 18 years. I would also expand the scope of this bill to include ALL federal judges, many of whom legislate from the bench. And I would not place a limit on the number of justices a president could nominate, 9 is a good number IMHO. And I would also add that court-packing would be explicitly illegal.
Fine by me if they could somehow make this a Constitutional Amendment. I don't know of any other way to make it as close to permanent as possible. Perhaps include a clause that specifically requires 60 votes to change or delete this bill. That way, at least a future Congress would have to pass legislation specifically to change the requirement, and if the American voters let them get away with it, then I guess we'll get the gov't we deserve.
And finally, it's doubtful this bill has a chance in hell of getting through the current Senate. So it's mostly grandstanding to show the dem base their elected reps are leaving no sotne unturned int heir efforts to oppose Trump.
Better yet, once a Justice of the Supreme Court has served 10 years, upon meeting that bench mark, he or she should be confirmed or not in the following General Election. Both the OP and my suggestion cannot be in effect by the Congress alone, it requires a Constitutional Amendment.
The Supreme Court is best left up to the Legislative branch and not voters. We need a balance of power and the courts should not be beholding to the voters. That is where we get into trouble. Can you imagine a Pence, an AOC or an extremist on the Supreme Court. That would be real trouble.
This is why we are in real trouble: Thomas, Alto and Kavanaugh.
Yeah, heaven forbid the courts follow the law and the Constitution and not the whims of you commies.
.
Apparently you've never read nor comprehended the Constitution. The courts, in fact you mean judges and jurists, legislate from the bench - some by whim, some by bias and some by alcohol.
Really, I was always taught the function of a judge no matter at what lever are there to apply the law and Constitution to the disputes before them. If they are incapable of doing that they are in the wrong position.
.
LOL, did you teacher ever bring up 5-4 votes?