Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What is too old for the next Supreme Court Judge?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 08:54 AM
Original message
What is too old for the next Supreme Court Judge?
How old would be too old, in your opinion, for President Obama's next pick?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MattBaggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
1. Never trust anyone over the age of 30
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 09:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. I never found that amusing when I was 18...
I find it even less so, today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kaleva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
2. Thos who've already died of old age ought not be considered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. I don't know, that person would still be better than Alito, Scalia, Roberts and Thomas
More capable of intellectual thought at least.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
3. 60 nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wapsie B Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. My thoughts exactly.
60 would be pushing it. I'd like to think there's someone much younger out there who'd be qualified to be on the SCOTUS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MicaelS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #5
16. I agree 60 is it, no older. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
6. 55
We need someone who can serve at least 15-20 years. I'd prefer someone under 50.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. I am leaning toward that age as the cut off
as you said you get at least 15-20 years
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. And if they pick a healthy one in their 40s, we could get 25-40 years.
Given the current make up and the fact that the GOP has had a death grip on the court of decades, we have to get people who can outlive the bastards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. 40s and liberal would be perfect
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gidney N Cloyd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
7. Mid-50's. This isn't a job for late bloomers.
But neither do you want someone lacking in experience (in law and in life).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
panader0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
8. Good health should be a consideration
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
10. Hillary Clinton, sorry to say. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. You think thats who it might be?
Talk about some exploding heads.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. No. I think she won't get it because she's too old. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
12. Might be related to how old the pick is!
IMHO, young and liberal is best. All else is less best!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
18. I don't think age should be the primary factor...
It's too bad that the Supreme Court has become a political tool for the Parties. Who thinks Roberts and Alito are not Republican stooges??

If we can get 15 or twenty good years from a brilliant Justice, then that is better than 40 years of mediocrity from a Clarence Thomas, in my opinion.

So, I would say that 60 would be the ideal age, not over the hill.

Forty would be too young.

We should not think of appointments in terms of longevity, in my opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. I think age should be a flag issue, in other words too old should not be considered
The younger the selection the longer they will occupy that position and the less likely it will fall into the hands of the right (IMO)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
19. 45
Obama should appoint no SCOTUS Associate justice any older than 45.

Should the Chief Justice slot ever open up, no appointee older than 40.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. Agreed: 45 (nt)
Edited on Mon Apr-12-10 11:00 AM by w4rma
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 10:43 AM
Response to Original message
21. since 1900, there have been 13 SCOTUS appointments over 60
Eight under 50, twenty-two between 50-55 and twelve between 56-59.

The youngest: William O. Douglas at 40.
Among those named to the court after they were 60;
Holmes, Brandeis, Taft, Hughes, Cardozo, Warren, Blackmun, and Ginsburg.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
23. 94
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Obamanaut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
24. Pick any age and there is no guarantee that the selectee, however young or
or old, will not fall prey to some ailment - dementia, alzheimer's, ALS, etc. - that would render that selectee unable to perform the duties of the job.

Pick someone qualified who is currently in good health and get on with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. Isn't it true that the older one is the more likely the odds of them being affected by one of these
things?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Obamanaut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. Isn't it also true that one can be afflicted with most anything at
most any age?

Did you ever see the Labor Day telethon with Jerry Lewis? There are "kids" of all ages being struck down with various and sundry ailments.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
25. Should there be a minimum age?
I think that would be more appropriate. Obviously, Repubs want the youngest judges they can find that will do their bidding, regardless of what the law says. That is a dangerous precedent.

I think judges should be at least 55 years old and that might take a lot of the politics out of appointments?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. no. William O. Douglas was 40.
More than half of the justices appointed since 1900 were 55 or under at the time they joined the court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryAmish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-10 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
29. Anyone of the 60s generation should be excluded
For obvious reasons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC