Dims want to limit SCOTUS term to 18 years

Votto

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2012
54,350
53,450
3,605

I reckon they just don't want old farts in there that are not part of the "woke" generation they produce every so many years.

In fact, old justices is what stopped FDR at first with his "New Deal" as they declared in unconstitutional, which it was.

I reckon once they hit 80 they can then run for President?

Joe-Biden-Never-Wanted-This-Decades-Old-Scandal-to-Resurface.jpg
 
Wait they had the court for 60 years, the one time they lose it, they pull all this shit...can we limit voting to people with the maturity of an adult......that would wipe out 90% of the left.....they are children....they always want to fuck with the system just because no one buys their bullshit.
 
They just don't like unpredictability.

They want to scheme and plan for replacements.

They are still pissed the old bat did not retire under Obama.
 
It's interesting that only the president has a term limit.

I might get behind an 18 year (or so) term limit for Supreme Court Justices if we also have a term limit of 12 years for the Senate and 8 years for the House.

Anyone know why the framers of the Constitution did not require term limits for Congress and the SCOTUS?...I've forgotten and am too lazy at the moment to look it up.
 
It's interesting that only the president has a term limit.

I might get behind an 18 year (or so) term limit for Supreme Court Justices if we also have a term limit of 12 years for the Senate and 8 years for the House.

Anyone know why the framers of the Constitution did not require term limits for Congress and the SCOTUS?...I've forgotten and am too lazy at the moment to look it up.

The framers did not require term limits for the President either. That didn't happen until the middle of the 20th century.
 
It's interesting that only the president has a term limit.

I might get behind an 18 year (or so) term limit for Supreme Court Justices if we also have a term limit of 12 years for the Senate and 8 years for the House.

Anyone know why the framers of the Constitution did not require term limits for Congress and the SCOTUS?...I've forgotten and am too lazy at the moment to look it up.
They did not account for people making politics a lifetime desire. The belief was they would serve and go on with life's work. Life's work ended up being a lifetime politician being proud "to serve us".
 
It's interesting that only the president has a term limit.

I might get behind an 18 year (or so) term limit for Supreme Court Justices if we also have a term limit of 12 years for the Senate and 8 years for the House.

Anyone know why the framers of the Constitution did not require term limits for Congress and the SCOTUS?...I've forgotten and am too lazy at the moment to look it up.

The framers did not require term limits for the President either. That didn't happen until the middle of the 20th century.

That I remember - well, I wasn't actually there - but I do remember that was because of FDR's four terms. In doing a little research it seems that the two terms was a sort of unwritten agreement, apparently because Washington refused to run for a 3rd term. That I did not know.
 
Democrats are assholes who turn against the Constitution every time the Constitutional way of doing things hands them a loss.
 
My take is its the similar exercise in futility we saw from Republicans with their bills getting rid of Obamacare during his presidency. No way do I see them submitting this bill before November's election. It won't see the light of day if Biden wins.
 
It's interesting that only the president has a term limit.

I might get behind an 18 year (or so) term limit for Supreme Court Justices if we also have a term limit of 12 years for the Senate and 8 years for the House.

Anyone know why the framers of the Constitution did not require term limits for Congress and the SCOTUS?...I've forgotten and am too lazy at the moment to look it up.
They did not account for people making politics a lifetime desire. The belief was they would serve and go on with life's work. Life's work ended up being a lifetime politician being proud "to serve us".


I've always thought the same - that public service was a burden and a politician would serve a few terms and go home to his real job. Of course that was before politics became so 'profitable'.

I'm curious if there are any actual writings explaining why the framers specifically decided on life time appoints for the SC and unlimited 2 or 6 year terms for Congress. Do you think it's only because it never occurred to them that someone might make a lifetime career of politics?...or live into their 80's?
 
It's interesting that only the president has a term limit.

I might get behind an 18 year (or so) term limit for Supreme Court Justices if we also have a term limit of 12 years for the Senate and 8 years for the House.

Anyone know why the framers of the Constitution did not require term limits for Congress and the SCOTUS?...I've forgotten and am too lazy at the moment to look it up.

The framers did not require term limits for the President either. That didn't happen until the middle of the 20th century.
President Washington refused to serve more than 2 years, which set an unwritten rule for all other Presidents after him to serve only 2 years. All Presidents respected the unwritten rule except for.........................................................King FDR. It was only after his corrupt rule and reign Congress decided that term limits needed to be applied.

Of course, corruption only occurs in the Executive Branch, not legislative, which is why those in Congress obviously don't need one.

I mean, what would we do without the never ending clown show?

th
 
My take is its the similar exercise in futility we saw from Republicans with their bills getting rid of Obamacare during his presidency. No way do I see them submitting this bill before November's election. It won't see the light of day if Biden wins.

I think you're correct. One of the great many reasons I'm not a Democrat. Something like that--18 years, 24 years, 30 years.... it makes perfect sense given the leaps and bounds our society makes in communications, technology, etc.... Our business model is 200+ years old. Such a limit would be a logical change. Especially given the Senate's hesitation to consider nominees outside of the political party of their nominator. But, you're right. If Biden wins the election, there will be zero push for something that probably should have been done 40 years ago. Let alone a push to force the Senate or House to do their jobs such as turn over impeachment cases as Pelosi hesitated in doing and considering nominees.
 

I reckon they just don't want old farts in there that are not part of the "woke" generation they produce every so many years.

In fact, old justices is what stopped FDR at first with his "New Deal" as they declared in unconstitutional, which it was.

I reckon once they hit 80 they can then run for President?

Joe-Biden-Never-Wanted-This-Decades-Old-Scandal-to-Resurface.jpg

~~~~~~
Prior to 1951 there were no term limits placed on Presidents or Supreme Court Justices. Under Harry S. Truman during 1947 States began to ratify the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution limiting the presidency to two four year terms.
 
It's interesting that only the president has a term limit.

I might get behind an 18 year (or so) term limit for Supreme Court Justices if we also have a term limit of 12 years for the Senate and 8 years for the House.

Anyone know why the framers of the Constitution did not require term limits for Congress and the SCOTUS?...I've forgotten and am too lazy at the moment to look it up.

The framers did not require term limits for the President either. That didn't happen until the middle of the 20th century.
President Washington refused to serve more than 2 years, which set an unwritten rule for all other Presidents after him to serve only 2 years. All Presidents respected the unwritten rule except for.........................................................King FDR. It was only after his corrupt rule and reign Congress decided that term limits needed to be applied.

Of course, corruption only occurs in the Executive Branch, not legislative, which is why those in Congress obviously don't need one.

I mean, what would we do without the never ending clown show?

th

~~~~~~
However, from the outset the Constitutional elected term of the presidency has always been four years.
 
If Democrats were able to manipulate this idea into practice, and the SCOTUS was 6-3 in favor of Republicans, you can bet the Democrats would repeatedly try to whittle it down, little by little. First, 18 to 15. Then to 10. Then to 5.

Just another example of Democrat disregard for public good, in deference to what's good for THEM.
 
Under Harry S. Truman during 1947 States began to ratify the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution limiting the presidency to two four year terms.

The 22nd Amendment was sent to the states for ratification by a REPUBLICAN Congress. Harry Truman had NOTHING to do with it. It was spurred by the DEMOCRATS' concealment of FDR's deteriorating health during the 1944 election. (He died six months later.)

Are you ignorant of these FACTS, or are you deliberately deceitful?
 

Forum List

Back
Top