• FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    8 or 10 sounds okay since they’re appointed by POTUS, shorter terms might be problematic because it would make it easier to stack unless we limit that power somehow. I don’t want mummies holding office forever to cement precedent, I want progress which aligns with the views of the current majority of voters.

    H.J.Res. 174: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to provide for term limits for justices of the Supreme Court.

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-joint-resolution/174?hl=H.J.Res.+174&s=4&r=1

    https://www.congress.gov/119/bills/hjres174/BILLS-119hjres174ih.pdf

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      16 hours ago

      8 or 10 sounds okay

      But why? Like, what’s the reasoning of 10 years rather than 12 or 6 or 24? It seems like we’re trying to apply a magic number to a policy problem. If the SCOTUS judges come to the same rules with different term limits, are we going to come back here and say we need to fiddle with the magic number some more?

      I don’t want mummies holding office forever to cement precedent

      I think one of the upshots of lifetime term limits has been younger and younger bench appointees. Roberts was 50 when he took the job.

      H.J.Res. 174: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to provide for term limits for justices of the Supreme Court.

      Well, there’s the damned thing. Not great that it has zero co-sponsors. But I guess people are talking about it, which is nice.

      “The tenure in office of a justice of the Supreme Court may not exceed 18 years. In the case of any justice who is serving as of the ratification of this amendment, if the tenure in office of that justice is 18 years or more, that term of that justice shall be terminated. If such a justice is the Chief Justice, the position shall be filled in accordance with law.”

      Ah, I see he’s got balls enough to put the right kind of language in there. Wish he could rally some other reps behind this idea before he launched it.

      • GuyFawkesV@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        In support of 18 it’s terms staggered every two years with the current 9 justices, so each president gets two. Personally I’d hope after year 1 and year 3, so as to avoid any tomfoolery of immediately taking office and installing a troublemaker.

        Not quite sure how I’d handle it if we get to 13 Justices like we’ll need to.