Should Supreme Court Judges Be Popularly Elected?

[ShootSpeeders]

Looks like obozo is trying to force ginsberg out so he can put super-racist Eric Hitler on the court where he will likely serve for 30 years with no oversight. Supreme Court judges have given themselves final say on every issue and have also given themselves authority to write laws. Constitution says they can't do it but they do it.

They run the country and they should come up for election every 6 years.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Why did our founding fathers give the judges lifetime tenure? They never foresaw what we have today with the SCOTUS effectively acting as dictator. Congress should have curbed their power grab long ago, but they don't care.

 

[ogibillm]

no

 

[jwoodie]

No, but the should appointed to staggered 20 year terms and confirmed by 2/3 of the Senate.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

no

The board notes that, like all liberals, you hate democracy.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

We don't even elect our representatives any more.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

No, but the should appointed to staggered 20 year terms and confirmed by 2/3 of the Senate.

20 years is still too long though i could see 10. And confirmation by 2/3 of the senate AND the house.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

The real solution to our runaway SCOTUS is a return to states rights. The states should refuse to obey all laws written by judges and also all constitutional rewrites that come from judges. The constitution says judges cannot do either.

 

[kaz]

Looks like obozo is trying to force ginsberg out so he can put super-racist Eric Hitler on the court where he will likely serve for 30 years with no oversight. Supreme Court judges have given themselves final say on every issue and have also given themselves authority to write laws. Constitution says they can't do it but they do it.

They run the country and they should come up for election every 6 years.

I'm for eliminating lifetime appointments for sure. But I would like to see judicial review removed from them as a power and put in the hands of State legislatures. Putting limits on Federal power in the hands of Federal employees was a bad idea. And one the Supreme Court gave itself.

Power divided is power checked. I would do something like to overturn a Federal law, one half plus one legislature can overturn it.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[

I'm for eliminating lifetime appointments for sure. But I would like to see judicial review removed from them as a power and put in the hands of State legislatures. .

It's already there in the hands of state legislatures. They just don't do it. The constitution never explicitly says who has authority to decide if a law is constitutional - so by the tenth amendment, the states have it.

 

[Staidhup]

Absolutely not. The Supreme Court remains the only remaining check to the abuse of power demonstrated by the President and Congress. To politicize the court or adopt limit terms is a step toward compromising the intent of the founders in the preservation of our Constitutional rights.
As for EH ascending to the court, it would require confronting his past testimony before Congress and potential perjury charges. It would be very unlikely, considering his record, he could gain the necessary votes required.

 

[BluesLegend]

The simple solution would be to divide the United States in half, let liberals and their ilk destroy their half and stack their court with their insane leftist commies while conservatives live happily ever after in our half.

 

[Justin Davis]

Looks like obozo is trying to force ginsberg out so he can put super-racist Eric Hitler on the court where he will likely serve for 30 years with no oversight. Supreme Court judges have given themselves final say on every issue and have also given themselves authority to write laws. Constitution says they can't do it but they do it.

They run the country and they should come up for election every 6 years.

All federal judges might as well be elected since so many of them vote their decisions like legislators.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Absolutely not. The Supreme Court remains the only remaining check to the abuse of power demonstrated by the President and Congress..

HAHAHA. Are you serious? And who acts as a check on the supreme court? Answer is no one. OTOH, the public acts as a check on congress and the president.. THINK

 

[ShootSpeeders]

All federal judges might as well be elected since so many of them vote their decisions like legislators.

Yup - judges, like legislators, sell their vote on every issue. Bribery is everywhere in govt.

 

[OKTexas]

YES! Lets have the supremes running for popular election every 6 years so they can be loyal to the financial elite just like our senators. Got to be the worse idea in history.

 

[saveliberty]

The Supreme Court should not be elected. Checks and balances work. Unfortunately the public has refused to do their part. Low voter turnout, lack of Constitutional amendments to limit federal power to name a few.

 

[Kondor3]

Electing Supreme Court judges? Hmmmmm. Interesting concept. The six-year term mentioned above might work.

We could always try a twelve (12) year term.

Every four years - during national General Elections - three of the judges would stand for re-election.

A rotational system similar to that found in the Senate.

This way, they're not Lifetime Appointees, and no particular groundswell of partisan sentiment will overwhelm any more than one-third (1/3) of the bench at any given time.

Another sort of lightweight checks-and-balances control mechanism.

Oh, for a way to fast-track a Constitutional Amendment for such purposes.

 

[Staidhup]

Absolutely not. The Supreme Court remains the only remaining check to the abuse of power demonstrated by the President and Congress..

HAHAHA. Are you serious? And who acts as a check on the supreme court? Answer is no one. OTOH, the public acts as a check on congress and the president.. THINK

The court is charged to interpret the constitutionality of law, the key word is interpret. We can all find examples of interpretations that we disagree with, however, what other option do you suggest? You state that the public acts as a check on congress and the president, however, congress has been maintaining the lowest approval rating than the president for decades, without the independence of the court you have the seeds of tyranny sprouting. I for one do not appreciate being told how to live by the majority living in the big city, nor do I feel the east coast and its population base has the right to dictate and straddle me with their financial mismanagement. In short I am not a federalist and do not see the value in a strong omnipotent centralized federal government that simply exists to protect itself.

 

[rightwinger]

No