Preview

Term Limit In Supreme Court Justices

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1001 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Term Limit In Supreme Court Justices
Congress and the states should pass an amendment that allows a staggered 18-year term limit on the tenure of the Supreme Court justices. Under this proposal, each justice would serve for 18 years, and the terms would be established so that there is a vacancy every two years. The vacancies would be on the first and third years of the presidential term. This would allow enough time so that the senate would pass somebody through and the president would not be denied one of his two appointees. The terms would be non-renewable, so each justice could only serve one eighteen year term. Although term limits would be a great idea, some complications may arise. For example, how do you apply the term limit system to the current justices? Since the …show more content…
First, a term limit may hurt the judicial independence. One of the best arguments against term limits is that life tenure frees justices from political pressure. Justices are not elected officials, and it would be gratifying for them to not feel the pressure of ordinary politics. Also, we do not want the justices to worry about their life after their Supreme Court career is over. The justices may become worried about how they vote on specific cases if they are trying to gain the respect of public opinion. Second, the Supreme Courts validity might be jeopardized by shortening the term limits. Having life tenure allows the justices to interpret the law exactly the way they see fit. People support the Supreme Court even in disagreements because they believe they are involved in something greater than ordinary politics (Ringhand np). Third, term limits could not eliminate all aspects of political gamesmanship. The Senate would still have the power to refuse to act on a nomination or vote down a nominee they find …show more content…
One of the major jobs for the federal judges is to protect the United States from the “tyranny of the majority”. Furthermore, even if the majority rules, the minority still has rights. Many components of the Bill of Rights, which the judges are called to enforce, are designed to protect the rights of the unpopular minorities. Being a Supreme Court judge is a difficult job, and even with life tenure, they are not completely immune from political pressure. They remain members of society; therefore it is difficult to allow things to happen even if they know it is morally wrong, but constitutionally

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Before the election, if President Obama was not able to get the Senate to approve his United States Supreme Court applicant, the next president would potentially be responsible for filling the vacant spots on the court over the term due to possible retirements and deaths. If a Republican is elected president, the court could continue to issue decisions that are favorable to conservatives in the many cases it hears. If a Democrat is elected president, the court could shift towards a more liberal direction. How the new president forms the court will differ depending on which party controls the Senate after the…

    • 103 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    As the Constitution was created, some topics were explained in great detail, yet some were explained very vaguely causing many disputes over how certain topics should be dealt with. In Article III, it states how the Judicial Branch works. It decides what the court bases their decisions on. In Article II of the U.S. Constitution it states how a justice must be replaced, who picks the new justice, which is the president, yet there is no time frame stated on how long it must take to pick a new justice. The president of the United States is to pick the new justice and the Senate confirms it. After a sudden death to Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia, the decision must be made to pick a new justice now or to allow the new…

    • 285 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Although having increased slots in the Supreme Court would boost the potential for diversity, the amendment fails to cause any meaningful change in the actual diversity of the Court. Additionally, allowing for the possibility of a deadlocked Supreme Court would greatly increase the power of the appellate court. This power increase could have some negative side effects, as appointments to the appellate court do not have the same scrutiny as Supreme Court appointments. Sabato’s third amendment has too many issues to be applied to the Constitution, striking a strong contrast to his fourth amendment. Sabato’s final amendment, in my opinion, would bring a much-needed improvement to the federal courts. Naturally, these judges need to have a salary that covers their living expenses, as requiring judges to ask for raises from Congress can allow for serious biases or manipulation to enter play. This amendment also lacks any meaningful downsides, as its worst drawback is simply increasing spending by the federal government. Overall, while two of Sabato’s amendments would work well, the second and third would bring many issues and need more…

    • 1195 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Although their are pro's and con's for each argument, I believe that it is better for the country to have no term limits on supreme court justices. It seems to me that the problems term limits cause, such as strategic retirement, are preferable to the alternative possibility, that the justices begin making decisions based on what would best help their personal careers in the…

    • 65 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Federal Judges Quiz Paper

    • 1242 Words
    • 5 Pages

    | Correct, "Article III federal judges" (as opposed to judges of some courts with special jurisdictions) serve "during good behavior" (often paraphrased as appointed "for life"). Judges hold their seats until they resign, die, or are removed from office.…

    • 1242 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Expertise and experience in government has become proportionately more valuable and can be better that a fresh perspective. In addition, term limits may prevent the best person for the job from being elected. Voters who believe extended incumbency undermines our democratic system free to vote against their particular incumbents. Denying other voters the right to choose a particular candidate whom they have chosen many times before is inherently unjust. Our system of representative democracy rests on citizens choosing the legislatures that they believe are the best choose despite how many years that they have served in…

    • 1119 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Having our Supreme Court Justice serving on the bench for life can have pros and cons. Although, most of our fellows americans seem to have more drawbacks about our Supreme Court of Justice life tenure position. With this in mind, let me first mention the pros…

    • 502 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Term Limits for the Supreme Court Justices Intro Paragraph Imagine one of the highest ranked government officials having a memory loss disease such as Alzheimer’s. One-in-nine Americans over 65 has Alzheimer’s disease. Currently, seven out of the eight Supreme Court Justices is over the age of 65. Supreme Court justices serve a life-long term according to the Constitution, but there should be a term limit.…

    • 1104 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    There should be an implementation of term limits in Congress to better maintain power. Some of the benefits of term limits bring include less corruption and corporate influence, along with fresh new ideas. Term limitations ensure our representatives will pay more attention to us, their constituents. Since our government cannot be trusted sometimes, term limits prevent someone from getting too powerful. Therefore, term limits have proven to be useful and should be…

    • 485 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Supreme Court of the United States was created by the Article Three, Section One of the Constitution and plays an incredibly important role in the balance of power within the United States. To that extent, it’s important to know the judicial philosophies of the judges who sit on the highest court in the United States. These philosophies are responsible for influencing lives of Americans depending on how they are recognized and implemented. It becomes even more imperative to understand with the knowledge that the court itself appoints a new justice, on average of every two years. (Regan, 2015, p. 18) With how influential their cases can be, it’s also important to understand how it can affect the nation as a whole, when those philosophies…

    • 1965 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Supreme Court needs younger judges to function better. The supreme courts judges will not function very well because they are missing one judge out of nine judges. For example “Antonin Scalia suffered from coronary artery disease, obesity and diabetes” and this shows that the Supreme Court will not function properly with old judges. Therefore, term limits are a great idea because younger judges are less likely to have any medical problems that will interfere with their job. 10-20 years is long enough for a judge to build up genuine exercise and genuine powers and the majority of Americans are in favor.…

    • 625 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In order to be successful in persecuting civil and criminal wrongs, the courts need funding if they want to accomplish anything. University of Austin (2017), the only area that has sufficient funding is the jail system. The Texas government issued a mandate to relieve overcrowding by building new jails and adding on to the old ones. However, with all the accused criminals coming from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals flooding into jails, it is almost impossible to prevent overcrowding. Impacts like these have led to numerous problems, including higher tensions among inmates, which has led to increased violence. Situations like these are why I think the Texas government should preserve the same structure in the court system while increasing their funding. Finding ways to do this can and will be difficult because of how many cases come through Texas each year. I would like to see this change because it has become apparent that the system needs more funding to stay on top of all the cases. This change also needs to occur in order to build more jails since overcrowding has become such a serious issue. The only other state that could compare to the correctional facilities in Texas would be California. However, even with California as an example, I think it would be wise to keep the structure of the Texas Supreme Court the way it is. I believe having a separate, multi layered judicial branch of government is an extremely effective way of doing things. One side handling the civil cases while the other side handles the criminal cases opens many doors for lawyers to specialize in either criminal or civil law, which makes the court run more…

    • 1068 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Exclusionary Rule

    • 355 Words
    • 2 Pages

    I think some things could be updated not only in the criminal justice system but the Constitution and statutes. The judges are given…

    • 355 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Dred Scott Reflection

    • 947 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Throughout the class this was a reoccurring theme, nine unelected lawyers determine a decision that could change the face of our nation. This can be seen in many of the more controversial Supreme Court decisions. For example, if Plessy V Ferguson would have been decided differently the nation would look entirely different. With the immense power that the Supreme Court has and its ability to shape the nation it is not worth the risk that they may get a decision wrong. Rather they should leave a lot of these decisions up to the legislators because if the legislators get something wrong their constituents will have sway and may be able to get it changed. Whereas, if the Supreme Court makes a decision it sets precedent and are therefore setting policy for the nation as unelected legislators. With this ability to set policy and precedent it is dangerous that we give them this ability with almost no…

    • 947 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Although sometimes this is necessary in order for progression and a fair society. Inaction (restraint) may actually be only looking after the interests of Conservatives) Many Conservatives argue that the FF never intended the SC to yield so much power.They believe judges should have adjudicative role only.They believe policy decisions should only be made by democratically elected representatives of the people.They believe the prestige of the court system would be diminished by involvement in political decisions Stare Decisis (Let things be) precedent. Counter Can the US society function without people looking after the Constitution and reinterpreting it for the benefit of all Think Gay rights, rights of women, immigrants, Blacks. Times change social change happens opponents argue that restraint allows judges to passively accept values without question these are contrary to US societys values AA are not slaves anymore 14th Amendment needs to protect them too and so restraint has political significance because it allows Conservative and republican views to remain undisturbed this pleases the right wing, particularly the…

    • 527 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays