samsingh
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-23-10 11:35 AM
Original message |
Can term limits be placed on the Supreme Court? |
|
Can we just put retirement conditions on the Supreme Court? good-bye Scalia, Thomas and the other infamous 5.
|
glowing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-23-10 11:52 AM
Response to Original message |
1. I think it is def. time to term limit their asses.... that way there is a check on the Senate. |
|
Those people are supposed to do the check and balance on a nominee. Most of them are egotistical clowns. I think 10yrs is more than enough time to wreck havoc on the system.
|
DavidDvorkin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-23-10 11:58 AM
Response to Original message |
2. That would require a Constitutional amendment |
|
It would be a good thing but very hard to get passed.
|
customerserviceguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-23-10 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. I'd say it would be impossible |
|
You'd have to get three-fourths of the states to agree, even if you got the necessary two-thirds of Congress. Thirteen states will always like the Court the way that it is, no matter what.
|
DavidDvorkin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-23-10 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
samsingh
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-23-10 12:09 PM
Response to Original message |
3. for what reason would someone unrecommend this idea? |
|
yes, i have stupid ideas from time to time, but this is not one of them!
|
Dreamer Tatum
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-23-10 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
8. Because it's a Sour Grapes Idea |
|
Tell me something - would you have pushed for SCOTUS term limits two days after Roe v Wade? Brown v Board?
Didn't think so.
|
treestar
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-23-10 12:11 PM
Response to Original message |
5. That would be a good idea |
|
In the Founding Fathers' Day, they just didn't live that long.
|
sharesunited
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-23-10 12:12 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Would they be eligible for re-nomination and re-confirmation? Or subject to lifetime exclusion? |
samsingh
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-23-10 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. renomination would be fine - at least they know they would be |
|
accountable again. this way they can do whatever they want.
isn't scalia a revolting piece of work? does thomas have an idea in his head that wasn't put there by scalia?
|
sharesunited
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-23-10 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
10. It would make the advise and consent process a political roadblock for some. |
|
Would Marshall and Stevens have been re-confirmed, given the political dynamic affecting the composition of the Senate?
Blackmun and Souter actually grew into quasi-liberals, causing much regret on the right.
It has its pros and cons.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 04:42 AM
Response to Original message |