3 ms·
All judicial positions should have a set term, after which a new judge is appointed to the position, even at the Supreme Court level. For example, at the Supre
by tomohawk 6y ago
All judicial positions should have a set term, after which a new judge is appointed to the position, even at the Supreme Court level.
For example, at the Supreme Court level, if each position was an 18 year term, each offset by 2 years, then a new justice would be nominated every other year to serve no more than 18 years. If a judge left early, the position would be filled until the end of the term.
This would prevent some of the shenanigans where partisan judges wait until the political winds are blowing in the right direction before stepping down to ensure that "their side" doesn't lose out.
This would also prevent judges serving for several decades with no realistic way to remove them.
Having served once, a judge could be renominated, but would have to go through the approval process again.
- smt88 6y ago> All judicial positions should have a set term, after which a new judge is appointed to the position, even at the Supreme Court level. The problem with this is exactly the problem with all term limits: you can "sell" your decisions at the end of your term. Example: Kentucky's former governor pardoned some incredibly repulsive people because they were donors (or connected to donors)[1] and he had already lost his election. 1. https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article238437623.html https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article238...
- tomohawk 6y agoYou can't fix stupid. There is no perfect system. But, we can do better. Requiring judges to go through a periodic review to continue seems like a good thing to try.