Coming to Terms With Supreme Court Tenure
Life tenure for Supreme Court justices is a fixed feature of the constitutional landscape. Or is it? Some noted law professors are seeking a re-examination of that tradition by advancing a proposal that would, in effect, force justices into senior status after about 18 years. The professors hope to force the country to face what they say is a long-ignored problem of ever-lengthening and increasingly unaccountable service on the nation's highest court.
At first blush, I scoffed at this idea. After all, life tenure for federal judges is in the Constitution and is considered central to the separation of powers. But after reading this article, I have to admit, it's at least worth thinking about. From Tony Mauro at Legal Times via Law.com.
Comments
I am currently doing a paper on this isuue in school. I personally think that the Justices should not have life tenure. Please Post your opinons and i might use them in may paper.
Thanks
Posted by: Ashlee | March 23, 2005 12:36 PM
I think they should have life tenure because it has worked for over 200 years. And even if the justices do become senile, they will probably retire before that happens.
Posted by: Evan | April 20, 2005 9:13 AM