The Founders were wrong to grant Supreme Court justices life tenure

B

BidenPresident

Verified User
The Founders didn’t expect us to have life spans as long, a judiciary as powerful or partisanship as intense as we do. One result is that the course of government policy on a very wide range of issues depends crucially on what the retirement plans and health of nine people happens to be. Another is that every vacancy on the Supreme Court sets off an ugly battle. Justices also stick around long after their confirmations: Nowadays, they serve nearly twice as long as the average justice before 1970.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/09/25/supreme-court-term-limits-life-tenure/
 
BidenPresident said:
The Founders didn’t expect us to have life spans as long, a judiciary as powerful or partisanship as intense as we do. One result is that the course of government policy on a very wide range of issues depends crucially on what the retirement plans and health of nine people happens to be. Another is that every vacancy on the Supreme Court sets off an ugly battle. Justices also stick around long after their confirmations: Nowadays, they serve nearly twice as long as the average justice before 1970.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/09/25/supreme-court-term-limits-life-tenure/
Click to expand...

The founding fathers were smart enough to give us a document that allowed the US to flourish but you think some no name Washington Post reporter is smarter than them. What is wrong with you?
 
I was interested enough to log off so that I could read British Petroleum's ideas about this.

Just as I disagree with term limits,
I disagree with service limitations on SCOTUS.

They just sit on their asses.
They're not working in mines.
They don't have to be young.

The problem we have with this branch of government
is the problem we have with our own electorate.

If we vote for asshole presidents and asshole senators,
we get assholes nominated and confirmed for the court.

That's exactly where we are now with the three stooges Trump brought to the SCOTUS.

We already had the Republican-appointed dipshits Thomas, Alito, and Roberts.

Then RBG, one of the greatest patriots and public servants in American history,
fucked us over by dying.
[It probably wasn't the poor old broad's fault; everybody dies sooner or later.]

Then we got Trump's three pieces of crap,
Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and least qualified of all,
the screwball bitch Barrett.

Whose fault is that?

I'm no huge fan of our poorly written constitution,
and while its fakakta provisions allowed it to happen,

the constitution didn't create the Republican Party,
didn't elect Trump,
and didn't appoint the present gaggle of insane and inept justices.

We can thank contemporary American motherfuckers for that.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
I was interested enough to log off so that I could read British Petroleum's ideas about this.

Just as I disagree with term limits,
I disagree with service limitations on SCOTUS.

They just sit on their asses.
They're not working in mines.
They don't have to be young.

The problem we have with this branch of government
is the problem we have with our own electorate.

If we vote for asshole presidents and asshole senators,
we get assholes nominated and confirmed for the court.

That's exactly where we are now with the three stooges Trump brought to the SCOTUS.

We already had the Republican-appointed dipshits Thomas, Alito, and Roberts.

Then RBG, one of the greatest patriots and public servants in American history,
fucked us over by dying.
[It probably wasn't the poor old broad's fault; everybody dies sooner or later.]

Then we got Trump's three pieces of crap,
Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and least qualified of all,
the screwball bitch Barrett.

Whose fault is that?

I'm no huge fan of our poorly written constitution,
and while its fakakta provisions allowed it to happen,

the constitution didn't create the Republican Party,
didn't elect Trump,
and didn't appoint the present gaggle of insane and inept justices.

We can thank contemporary American motherfuckers for that.
Click to expand...

Your gutter vocabulary precedes you, old man.

Did you learn this low class prose in the barnyard?

Do you live in the ghetto, old man?

Your GED did not serve you well.
 
Democrats hate the Constitution, obviously. They hate that the minority gets to have rights protected against the will of the majority. It's why they have spent YEARS lying to the people about America as a democracy, conflating and confusing people that a 'republic' is democracy.

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/09/...new-threat-to-democracy-the-u-s-constitution/

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell said over the weekend that: “The Constitution has some profoundly anti-democratic, which is to say anti-democracy components, like the Electoral College and the two senators per state, for example.”
Click to expand...
 
The problem is SC judges have granted themselves authority to both write laws and repeal laws, something the constitution says they don't have. "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states."
 
I have no doubt that they saw the court as an objective entity that would not be involved in any ideologies. They did not anticipate the kind of extremist, hyper-partisan court that we have now.
 
BartenderElite said:
I have no doubt that they saw the court as an objective entity that would not be involved in any ideologies. They did not anticipate the kind of extremist, hyper-partisan court that we have now.
Click to expand...

they did not anticipate that the populace would idiotically allow political parties to dominate them and politicize an otherwise neutral position.
 
the issues with the Supreme Court all stem with the capture of the court by right wing dark money and the Federalist Society.

They will continue to push less and less qualified and experienced judges into each level of the judiciary, and they see 'being dumb' as a benefit, as they have complained about supporting intellectual right wing Justices in the past, who then comprise and vote across lines. they know dumb judges who are more ideologues will be less and less inclined to compromise. Thus why you are now seeing judges like Aileen Cannon (broke law for Trump) and Matthew Kacsmaryk (is trying to block birth control nation wide), who simply do not care to follow the law.

it is good judges like Cannon and Kacsmaryk have been exposed now, as you can rest assured they would have been on the fast track, by the Federalist society to the various Superior Courts, and then the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, I am confident, there are dozens more, dumber and more ideologues, already in place by the Federalist society who have not been exposed yet.
 
BidenPresident said:
The Founders didn’t expect us to have life spans as long, a judiciary as powerful or partisanship as intense as we do. One result is that the course of government policy on a very wide range of issues depends crucially on what the retirement plans and health of nine people happens to be. Another is that every vacancy on the Supreme Court sets off an ugly battle. Justices also stick around long after their confirmations: Nowadays, they serve nearly twice as long as the average justice before 1970.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/09/25/supreme-court-term-limits-life-tenure/
Click to expand...

What really added to the incompetence of the Supreme Court is when Mitch made it a majority vote, made appointment 100% political, previously at least confirmation meant some compromise and reaching across the aisle
 
Lifetime appointments are to allow the judges to ignore political power. They do not have to care what the wealthy and politicians want. That assumed that judges were ruling according to the constitution, law, and precedence. We have a couple of judges now who seek support from them and rule for them in cases that hit the bench. A big flaw in the Constitution was altruism and the belief that people would be fair and honest brokers. They thought educated gentlemen would want to do the right thing for the country.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
. It's why they [Democrats] have spent YEARS lying to the people about America as a democracy, conflating and confusing people that a 'republic' is democracy.
I'm sorry, but you're not the shiniest penny in the roll, STY.
A constitutional democratic republic is a democracy by definition.

It's not an UNLIMITED democracy because the "constitutional" part
means that the resulting government is CONSTITUTED on certain ABSOLUTES.

[It bugs me, but conservatives don't make a lot of effort to understand what words mean.]

In our case, one of those absolutes is intended to be
protecting certain, particular, individual, specifically defined rights of minorities
from infringement by majority decree.

If you believe that this important protection is generally construed as being anti-democratic or undemocratic, however,
then that's one reason we DEMOCRATS recognize you as being off your fucking rocker.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
ExpressLane said:
The founding fathers were smart enough to give us a document that allowed the US to flourish but you think some no name Washington Post reporter is smarter than them. What is wrong with you?
Click to expand...

hint - what is wrong with him starts with an ret and ends with an ard
 
NiftyNiblick said:
I'm sorry, but you're not the shiniest penny in the roll, STY.
A constitutional democratic republic is a democracy by definition.

It's not an UNLIMITED democracy because the "constitutional" part
means that the resulting government is CONSTITUTED on certain ABSOLUTES.

[It bugs me, but conservatives don't make a lot of effort to understand what words mean.]

In our case, one of those absolutes is intended to be
protecting certain, particular, individual, specifically defined rights of minorities
from infringement by majority decree.

If you believe that this important protection is generally construed as being anti-democratic or undemocratic, however,
then that's one reason we DEMOCRATS recognize you as being off your fucking rocker.
Click to expand...

I realize that you probably avoid it now, but when you were younger, you probably said the pledge of allegiance..........

what does that pledge say about America?????

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands,"

I rest my case.
 
BidenPresident said:
The Founders didn’t expect us to have life spans as long, a judiciary as powerful or partisanship as intense as we do. One result is that the course of government policy on a very wide range of issues depends crucially on what the retirement plans and health of nine people happens to be. Another is that every vacancy on the Supreme Court sets off an ugly battle. Justices also stick around long after their confirmations: Nowadays, they serve nearly twice as long as the average justice before 1970.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/09/25/supreme-court-term-limits-life-tenure/
Click to expand...

Were you whining about this when RBG has her 87th birthday? Didn't think so.
 
ExpressLane said:
The founding fathers were smart enough to give us a document that allowed the US to flourish but you think some no name Washington Post reporter is smarter than them. What is wrong with you?
Click to expand...

The Founding Fathers did not think they were the gods you think they are. They accepted The Constitution was not perfect, and would have to be amended. There were 12 Amendments within 15 years, with 10 of them almost immediately.

There is nothing wrong with proposing another amendment. The Republican Party proposes dozens of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top