My Proposed Amendment To The US Constitution

[Viktor]

US Constitution:

The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour,

In the establishment of inferior courts, Congress can specify a "good behaviour" rule of review.

Good behavior means life since no term of years is mentioned.

 

[Viktor]

US Constitution:

The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour,

In the establishment of inferior courts, Congress can specify a "good behaviour" rule of review.

These judges, often referred to as “Article III judges,” are nominated by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Article III states that these judges “hold their office during good behavior,” which means they have a lifetime appointment, except under very limited circumstances.

About Federal Judges | United States Courts​

https://www.uscourts.gov › judges-judgeships › about-fed.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Good behavior means life since no term of years is mentioned.

And yet, the Constitution gives Congress plenary power to create the lower courts.
That said, there's no reason Congress, under the elastic clause, cannot define "good behavior".

 

[task0778]

Possibly "Good Behavior" could be interpreted by Congress as a requirement to review a federal judge's record after say 10 years or so and determine whether his/her is good enough to continue serving on the bench or not.

 

[JoeMoma]

Possibly "Good Behavior" could be interpreted by Congress as a requirement to review a federal judge's record after say 10 years or so and determine whether his/her is good enough to continue serving on the bench or not.

And who exactly would be qualified to do such a review. Members of Congress? Not a good idea.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And who exactly would be qualified to do such a review. Members of Congress? Not a good idea.

Whoever Congress specifies
Its a bad idea, but there's no need for an amendment to create the process.

I'm sure the 9th circuit - the most overturned federal court in history - would declare it unconstitutional , in self-defense.

 

[task0778]

And who exactly would be qualified to do such a review. Members of Congress? Not a good idea.

Well, Congress, specifically the Senate, did confirm those judges in the 1st place and I don't know who else would be in a better position to do that. They already have the power to impeach a judge I think, so maybe this is redundant.

 

[2aguy]

We are saddled with a large number of incompetent and corrupt Federal judges who don't enforce the Constitution they way they vowed to do. I want all District Federal Judges to have their appointments and behavior reviewed every 10 years by a Senate Committee and the bad ones removed from the bench.

A senate committee stacked with democrats? No thanks.....they would purge normal judges.....

 

[Colin norris]

The problem with that is the Senate is full of corrupt and incompetent politicians. Fat chance at having a senate committee qualified to do that.

No it's not. Its you hating the democratic process you enjoyed before but not happen with Biden.

You guys voted for them. Why the change of mind now?

 

[LuckyDuck]

We are saddled with a large number of incompetent and corrupt Federal judges who don't enforce the Constitution they way they vowed to do. I want all District Federal Judges to have their appointments and behavior reviewed every 10 years by a Senate Committee and the bad ones removed from the bench.

I would like to see the following Amendments added to the Constitution:
1. No presidential candidate may have passed the age of 70 years at the time of their inauguration.
2. As presidents are the Commanders-in-chief of our armed forces, all presidential candidates must have served at least one honorable term of military service in their life, regardless of the highest rank achieved, so that such candidates would have a working familiarity with the requirements of the military.
3. Political appointees who take an oath of office to protect and serve the Constitution and its Bill of Rights, found to be attempting to undermine and/or usurp said Constitution and its Bill of Rights must be removed from office for the violation of such oath.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

There has never been nor ever will be a form of gov't that will be better than the one we've already got, not as long as human nature exists. It isn't the Constitution that is the problem, it is the people who are charged with executing the functions therein. And if I might say so, the problem lies also with the people who are governed, by not holding elected and unelected officeholders accountable for their mistakes and misdeeds.

Wags Wearing Wigs

If that's true, you should want to change the Constitution so that it won't be so easy to abuse. But it's not true, and you know it. Your contempt for the American people, when they are so restricted by this elitist document that they have little choice but to submit to the Donkephant, is treason.

Free people do not need such an obstruction to the laws they want passed. This anti-democratic manifesto was written at a time when thinking that the King was not appointed by God was considered radically revolutionary. We don't need to be saddled with primitive ideas and snobbish attitudes from the horse-and-buggy era.

 

[task0778]

Wags Wearing Wigs

If that's true, you should want to change the Constitution so that it won't be so easy to abuse. But it's not true, and you know it. Your contempt for the American people, when they are so restricted by this elitist document that they have little choice but to submit to the Donkephant, is treason.

Free people do not need such an obstruction to the laws they want passed. This anti-democratic manifesto was written at a time when thinking that the King was not appointed by God was considered radically revolutionary. We don't need to be saddled with primitive ideas and snobbish attitudes from the horse-and-buggy era.

You got a better idea? Like oh, I dunno, maybe socialism? Listen up, dumb-fuck. There cannot and will not be any form of gov't that is impervious to fraud, waste, and abuse. And the founders knew that, which is why the gov't have is filled with checks and balances to prevent a totalitarian state. If you have a better solution then let's hear it.

 

[$ecular#eckler]

Nope, you dumbasses have never read Federalist 51

Separation of Powers: James Madison, Federalist, no. 51, 347--53

Just because the Federalists described some ideas in their essays that we recognize as being desirable, does not mean that they were able to deploy those ideas in the composition of the government charter.