FILLING THE SUPREME COURT

[Bogart]

I saw this thread somewhere else on here, but it kind of fizzled out. I would prefer to see justices appointed but for a set, say 10-year term. If other, please specify your method.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'd appoint them for 18 year terms, which a term expiring every 2 years.

[David S]

The founders did a great job of creating our constitution and I don't think I'd care to tamper with it so I voted for the current method. My only beef with the system is that while judges, representatives, senators and presidents are sworn to uphold the constitution, many immediately forget that oath as soon as they take office. There should be a constitutional provision for immediately removing from office anyone who violates that oath. I don't know how that could be done for judges though since they are the ones who determine what is and what is not constitutional.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

If Kerry wins, then he would be justified in packing the court. The Supreme Court isn't limited to just 9 members.

[John Dibble]

If Kerry wins, then he would be justified in packing the court. The Supreme Court isn't limited to just 9 members.

Actually, it is so long as Congress says it is. Congress determines the number of justices in the Supreme Court, and something tells me they won't increase that number(even if the Democrats regain control of it, it wouldn't be a popular move).

[Bandit3 the Worker]

As long as it's a rogue Congress, it doesn't have a right to determine anything.

Congress since 1995 has been rogue.

[John Dibble]

As long as it's a rogue Congress, it doesn't have a right to determine anything.

Congress since 1995 has been rogue.

Actually, as far as I'm concerned, it was rogue way before that, constantly butting into the affairs of the states and the people. But, assuming you are calling it rogue because it's Republican dominated, it will definitely not increase the number of justices just so a Democrat can pack the court.

[minionofmidas]

I'd like to see their terms end when they reach retirement age. (Which might be fixed a bit higher than 65, say 69 or so.) That way, you'd get vacancies far more frequently.

[Nym90]

As far as a provision for removing justices who violate the Constitution, such a provision already exists. Members of the Supreme Court can be impeached. If a member of the Court violates the Constitution he or she can be impeached by Congress, by the same procedure as the President can be.

[Bogart]

I'd appoint them for 18 year terms, which a term expiring every 2 years.

That's a good idea. Each president and each Congress would get the opportunity to impact the Court.

[Brambila]

Appointment at the end of the term gives the executive too much power. Life or retirement.

[specific_name]

Appointment for a set term. Electing judges would be a bad idea, because it would politicize the judiciary. Set terms are better than life time appointment, because the court gets stale over time.

[cwelsch]

As long as it's a rogue Congress, it doesn't have a right to determine anything.

Congress since 1995 has been rogue.

Show me that in the Constitution, unless you're talking revolution.  Apparently 'rogue' means occupied by the GOP?

[sobo]

The problem with the current method is that it is almost sure to maintain the status quo of the Supreme Court composition.  I know the court is not supposed to be political, but everyone knows which jusitices are conservative and which are liberal.  By refusing to retire, until a president of their party is in office, whichever party currently controls the Supreme Court can continue to control it, almost indefinately.  Sure this would fall apart if a party controlled the Presidency for about 20 years.  But how likely is that to happen?

[7,052,770]

I agree that appointing for life is the best.  18-year terms sounds so George Wallacesque.

[GOP = Terrorists]

I'd appoint them for 18 year terms, which a term expiring every 2 years.

I like it.  As long as they are not allowed to be appointed twice and still requires 60 votes in the Senate.