President Joe Biden - Kamala Harris Administration

#56,810
#56,810
NorthDallas40 said:
If it goes thru the correct process, a constitutional amendment, then fine.
Click to expand...

Ehh, I'm sure it would be a fight but I think they could place term limits on federal judges without amending the constitution. A lot of federal judges "retire" and become Sr Judges, they technically still hold their office so I think it could be done.
 
#56,812
#56,812
hog88 said:
Technically, the constitution doesn't say they are "lifetime appointments".
Click to expand...
It doesn't say "lifetime", but they are provided for lifetime tenure as spelled out in Article III. They need a Constitution Convention to do anything they say the want to do, if anything they should be looking at limiting Congress not the courts.

Supreme Court Justices serve lifetime appointments on the Court, in accordance with Article III of the United States Constitution.
Click to expand...

The Supreme Court Of The United States | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs
#56,813
#56,813
LSU-SIU said:
It doesn't say "lifetime", but they are provided for lifetime tenure as spelled out in Article III. They need a Constitution Convention to do anything they say the want to do, if anything they should be looking at limiting Congress not the courts.



The Supreme Court Of The United States | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Click to expand...

Yes, I understand that but I do think they could pass a law forcing them into semi-retirement. They would still hold their office as a sr judge they just wouldn't be active.
 
#56,815
#56,815
hog88 said:
Ehh, I'm sure it would be a fight but I think they could place term limits on federal judges without amending the constitution. A lot of federal judges "retire" and become Sr Judges, they technically still hold their office so I think it could be done.
Click to expand...
I’m ok with term limits but disagree on likelihood they can get it thru.
 
#56,816
#56,816
hog88 said:
Yes, I understand that but I do think they could pass a law forcing them into semi-retirement. They would still hold their office as a sr judge they just wouldn't be active.
Click to expand...

Hard to see how that is possible at the Supreme Court level without a Constitutional Convention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs
#56,818
#56,818
hog88 said:
Make no mistake about my posts, I don't think for a second that federal judiciary term limits will pass congress unless 1 party gets a super majority.
Click to expand...

You need a Constitutional Convention for all that. Lower courts can be setup by Congress but the ultimate power comes from Article III. This is the issue or part of the issue with administrative courts that congress isn't writing clear laws and non-courts i.e. administrative courts are making determinations.
 
#56,819
#56,819
hog88 said:
Make no mistake about my posts, I don't think for a second that federal judiciary term limits will pass congress unless 1 party gets a super majority.
Click to expand...
We agree on that then as long as it’s a constitutional amendment process. Simple legislation I don’t think will ever cut it… because the government branch they are trying to limit is the sole determiner on what is constitutional and what isn’t.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs
#56,820
#56,820
Franklin D Roosevelt started this crap. He didn't like the Supreme Court in the 1930s and their rules so he started the "Court Packing" situation. Funny, how we deal with a horrible, liberal court from 1960-2010s and no one complained then. This just comes off as whining because you don't like the results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol, tbwhhs and walkenvol
#56,822
#56,822
Grand Vol said:
I find it completely moronic the Potato in Chief calls for term limits on SCOTUS while ignoring the true threat to the Republic and not going after term limits on Congress.

Why not both?
Click to expand...
Only chance they will get it to pass via legislation and not a constitutional amendment I think. Because SCOTUS will gut any legislation that limits the judicial without similarly limiting the legislative
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1
#56,823
#56,823
First I want to say that the individual I saw debating Trump a few weeks ago is incapable of putting together the list of limits on the USSC, and presidential immunity being rolled out, so I don't think he has anything to really do with it.
Second, the driving force behind this must have a lot of confidence they will win (or lose?) the election this fall, because the unintended consequences from these actions put all our former POTUS at risk of prison and would effectively mean every POTUS will get at least 2 justices appointed, and the CoI issue could have major decisions being decided by a limited number of justices - ruling
Third, if there's a Constitutional Convention where term limits and conflicts of interest for the setting members and spouses in the judiciary , why would those standards not be imposed on the elected senators, representatives and those elected and appointed in the administration?
Is Biden and his staff potentially getting back at those who forced him out?
 
#56,824
#56,824
Grand Vol said:
I find it completely moronic the Potato in Chief calls for term limits on SCOTUS while ignoring the true threat to the Republic and not going after term limits on Congress.

Why not both?
Click to expand...

They are only complaining because they can't get there way.

Term limits on Congress won't solve anything. We need more educated voters (something we don't have). As long as we have voters with mush for brains, we will have problems.

Kind of sums up Churchill's quote:

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."

Keep in mind that freeloaders and drug addicts have the same voting power as you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs and UT_Dutchman
#56,825
#56,825
Grand Vol said:
I find it completely moronic the Potato in Chief calls for term limits on SCOTUS while ignoring the true threat to the Republic and not going after term limits on Congress.

Why not both?
Click to expand...

We have term limits on congress, they're called elections. I for one do not want the federal government stripping away more choices.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top