I am back after a fun vacation.
Something needs to be done to reign in judges and end the tyranny of judges who make law. One idea is end lifetime tenure
ADD (7/11 am)
I remove my endorsement of this solution to judicial tyranny. For more look at the comments section
4 years ago
Hey Mike,
ReplyDeleteI think lifetime tenure for judges is just fine.
For one, it is written into the text of the text of the Constitution and I generally believe in leaving the Constitution just the way it is and even if it was changed I do not think that would solve the problem of judicial activism.
First off, what evidence is there that limiting judges to 18 (or any number) years would change the way judges rule?
Second, what makes you think that if someone was forced to leave ofter 18 years that a judge you would like better would get put in?
Supreme Court justices often don't rule the way they are expected to.
Reagan nominated O'Connor and Kennedy and neither of them have been consistently conservative, as you would undoubtedly prefer. George H.W. Bush nominated Souter and he is consistently liberal.
So even if a judges 18 years were up, there is no guarantee that the replacement would be any better.
Also, I suspect that this whole issue would not even exist for conservatives were the situation reversed. Say Bork didn't get borked. The make up of the court would then Bork, Scalia, Thomas and Rehnquist all consistently conservative. Should Bush's replacement of O'Connor also rule consistently conservative that would be 5 consistenly conservative justices on the Supreme Court and no conservatives would want to see them forced out. If 18 years was the magic number Scalia would have been gone two years ago and Rehnquist long ago. Would you have gambled those conservative votes on a new justice?
I realize the problem of judicial activism does not end with the Supreme Court, but extends to lower federal courts as well. But my above arguments largely apply.
One thing that I think is positive about lifetime tenure for federal judges is that it promotes predictability and stability in the justice system. In U.S. jurisprudence the pendulum swings slow and I think that is a good thing. If judges could be easily removed they would just be lackeys for the party who was in control of the government, and could be removed by executive whim. I would rather have stability in the judiciary, even if I don't agree with every ruling.
Morris
OK, I am convinced. This may not be the best idea. Many constitutional amendments have gone astray. In fact, other than the Bill of Rights I think most of them have. That may be worth writing about. Anyway, removing tenure may not be the best solution. The real solution is education of the people, especially the next generation so that these actions are identified as tyranny and continue to be resisted. We need better judges and leaders all around. Have any other suggestions for correcting the current situation?
ReplyDelete