The Courts (not specific to either party)

TGHusker said:
All the more reasons for Biden's proposed changes to the SC.
Click to expand...
I’m of the opinion that Congress should tackle their own term limit problem and clean their own house with that specific issue before trying to impart it on another branch of government.  
 

It’s like a good business manager, parent or coach who says they never would tell their direct reports to have to do things they haven’t already done. 

 
Archy1221 said:
I’m of the opinion that Congress should tackle their own term limit problem and clean their own house with that specific issue before trying to impart it on another branch of government.  
 

It’s like a good business manager, parent or coach who says they never would tell their direct reports to have to do things they haven’t already done. 
Click to expand...
They do have term limits. You only get 2 or 6 years and then you have to win an election again. Competitions and rules, set aside, you only get the length of one term each time. SC faces none of these limits.

 
deedsker said:
They do have term limits. You only get 2 or 6 years and then you have to win an election again. Competitions and rules, set aside, you only get the length of one term each time. SC faces none of these limits.
Click to expand...
House incumbency reelection rate averages 92% roughly.  Senate incumbency re election rate averages roughly 82%.   Name recognition alone makes it extremely hard to primary someone. 

 
deedsker said:
Which isn't 100%. Those 8% and 18% must suck, respectively. 
Click to expand...
True, but 100% of SCOTUS justices are “term limited”  by death or optional retirement.   It’s just an open ended “term limit” 

Im not totally against changing the Constitution and doing some type of limit on SCOTUS.   But only after Congress shows us the way and how we can benefit by term limits for themselves.  

 
Archy1221 said:
I’m of the opinion that Congress should tackle their own term limit problem and clean their own house with that specific issue before trying to impart it on another branch of government.
Click to expand...
We can walk and chew gum at the same time.   I've been a long time advocate of Congressional term limits.  They should have been in place along time ago.   But because item one hasn't occurred doesn't mean we can't fix another problem. 

 
Archy1221 said:
True, but 100% of SCOTUS justices are “term limited”  by death or optional retirement.   It’s just an open ended “term limit” 

Im not totally against changing the Constitution and doing some type of limit on SCOTUS.   But only after Congress shows us the way and how we can benefit by term limits for themselves.  
Click to expand...
And so is congress. So both are term limited in your eyes.

 
I see a lot of conservatives advocating term limits for our entrenched politicians.

If we could bring the Supreme Court into the fold, would everyone be cool with that?

I think I would. Terms would not need to be identical among the three branches. 

 
Guy Chamberlin said:
I see a lot of conservatives advocating term limits for our entrenched politicians.

If we could bring the Supreme Court into the fold, would everyone be cool with that?

I think I would. Terms would not need to be identical among the three branches. 
Click to expand...
Agreed. They can and should be different.  The SC terms should be long enough to resist cultural ups and downs and short enough so that one party has a long term dominating position on the court. 

 
I remember watching the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings. Remember the apartment I was living in, the woman I was dating, the quasi rattail/mullet I had, the professional career I had stretching out before me.

Wow, was that a long time ago.

I think even a 20 year term limit for Supreme Court appointees would serve a purpose. 

 
Back
Top