What are people's thoughts on putting in limits on how long Supreme Court justices can serve?
Some options:
Keep it at lifetime appointments. On the one hand, it removes them from being swayed by post-justice money needs (i.e. unspoken quid pro quos), but also means you could get into the situation of having justices work until they are senile or mentally unstable.
Term limits (e.g. 18 years). Gives them time to make an impact, let's about every President have at least 1 appointment and minimizes the impact of any one President/Senate, but also gets into unspoken quid pro quo issues and potentially makes it more polarized.
Age restriction. On the one hand, if you put the cap at, say, 80, you will have greater turnover on the court, on the other you get into the potential of younger and younger justices being named.
Thoughts?
Some options:
Keep it at lifetime appointments. On the one hand, it removes them from being swayed by post-justice money needs (i.e. unspoken quid pro quos), but also means you could get into the situation of having justices work until they are senile or mentally unstable.
Term limits (e.g. 18 years). Gives them time to make an impact, let's about every President have at least 1 appointment and minimizes the impact of any one President/Senate, but also gets into unspoken quid pro quo issues and potentially makes it more polarized.
Age restriction. On the one hand, if you put the cap at, say, 80, you will have greater turnover on the court, on the other you get into the potential of younger and younger justices being named.
Thoughts?
