- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
So NOW the LA Times wants Supreme Court term limits...
Posted on 7/19/17 at 7:02 pm
Posted on 7/19/17 at 7:02 pm
Typical. They're okay with RBG spending a hundred years on the court, but now that Trump is poised to appoint 2-3 Justices in his first term, we need 18 year term limits.
Okay...
LINK
Okay...
LINK
18
Posted on 7/19/17 at 7:12 pm to VoxDawg
It seems like a reasonable thing though.
Posted on 7/19/17 at 7:13 pm to VoxDawg
The Supreme Court has way too much power.
Posted on 7/19/17 at 7:16 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
LA Times wants SC term limits
I bet they do now.....
Posted on 7/19/17 at 7:21 pm to VoxDawg
What is the original reason for no limit for Supreme Court justices?
Posted on 7/19/17 at 7:23 pm to VoxDawg
Odds that this article would have ever been published if Killery had won?
Posted on 7/19/17 at 7:26 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
So NOW Ben Feuer wants Supreme Court term limits,
Posted on 7/19/17 at 7:31 pm to VoxDawg
Congressional term limits need to be brought before this in my humble opinion
Posted on 7/19/17 at 7:33 pm to VoxDawg
The Constitution states that Justices "shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour." This means that the Justices hold office as long as they choose and can only be removed from office by impeachment.
Posted on 7/19/17 at 8:35 pm to VoxDawg
Study was done in 2006. Apparently wasn't a concern from 2009-2017. Hmm. Wonder why?
Posted on 7/19/17 at 8:57 pm to VoxDawg
Lifetime appointments are fine.
Legislatures need to be way more active about removing activist judges from the bench though.
The issue is that rogue judges run amok for decades.
Legislatures need to be way more active about removing activist judges from the bench though.
The issue is that rogue judges run amok for decades.
This post was edited on 7/19/17 at 8:58 pm
Posted on 7/19/17 at 9:24 pm to VoxDawg
The correct answer is 10 years.
Guarantees serving under 2 administrations.
Guarantees serving under 2 administrations.
Posted on 7/19/17 at 10:16 pm to VoxDawg
quote:they only serve one term
LA Times wants Supreme Court term limits
Posted on 7/19/17 at 10:27 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
Why the Supreme Court needs 18-year term limits
Because they are losing.
quote:
The mere idea that Kennedy’s seat could get filled by President Trump and the conservative Republican Senate has sent many on the left into a tailspin of anxiety and despair.
And reactionary children...who know they might not win again for a long long time. Their view of the world has been rejected.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 2:26 am to VoxDawg
The LA Times has less integrity than a carnival barker.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 5:24 am to VoxDawg
quote:
Steven Calabresi and James Lindgren proposed that Supreme Court justices should serve 18-year terms, with a new judge appointed every two years. Each president would effectively get to nominate two justices for every term in office, and the Senate would agree to promptly consider them on a regular schedule.
I've actually said for a long time that lifetime appointments are bad but this is dumb.
The court would swing wildly if as above.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 7:22 am to VoxDawg
All Federal judges should have term limits. Lifetime appointments are for the birds.
Posted on 7/20/17 at 7:40 am to VoxDawg
Or an age limit of 70 or so
Posted on 7/20/17 at 8:54 am to VoxDawg
I don't think it's necessarily wise to have an 85 year old in the court. I want someone of the most sound mind.
But 10-12 year stints isn't right either. Something like 'up to a 25 year term' seems more wise. Language that doesn't suggest the justice should serve out 25 but gives them the chance to do so.
But 10-12 year stints isn't right either. Something like 'up to a 25 year term' seems more wise. Language that doesn't suggest the justice should serve out 25 but gives them the chance to do so.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News