at least we avoided the sarchasm!
1 Like
Yes, there are individual examples of people who stay sharp as tacks into their 90ās. However, thatās a small subset: mental deterioration is a known issue in old age, and lack of physical exercise hastens that.
2 Likes
So is the supreme court, a very small subset. There is no vetting process for getting old. There is one for the Supreme Court.
Is there a particular justice, current or past, that gives you pause on this front? Specific individuals is very much what the SC justices are. Their individual judgement isā¦ well, enshrined into law. So we do choose carefully. I donāt think assuming someone in their 90s is incapable of sound judgement is very helpful, or kind.
1 Like
We donāt choose 90-year-olds; we choose 50-60-something year olds who then refuse to leave when realistically they are no longer capable of making complex decisions, especially if the āwrongā party is in office.
āSenior brainā isnāt just a joke: itās actually very real. Supreme Court decisions last for lifetimes, which is significantly less āhelpful or kindā to the victims of those decisions than putting regulations in place that mean an individual Justice doesnāt have to be singled out, itās just the rules.
Besides, the process of approving new Justices is less likely to be fought to the death if itās known that they canāt stay 40-50 years with no way to make them retire (unless they commit a major crime on the level of treason). And thatās really a big issue: we have a Congress that has announced (yet again) that they REFUSE to do their jobs until next year. Thatās a long time to go without a tie-breaker in the highest court in the land. Taking partisanship out of the process is probably closer to what the Founding Fathers had in mind than adhering to the letter of the law, especially since the letter of the law is vague on the subject:
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
3 Likes
Iād be willing to do 35-65. I think thatās reasonable, with a limit of two terms or 12 years.
I think the Supreme Court would be a bit harder. 50 does seem like a reasonable age but I think a retirement limit of 70 also seems appropriate.
Seventy? Theyāre not airline pilots! They do wield more power than pilots, but none of them have any power in isolation. If a Justice becomes senile, there are eight others in an unparalleled position to recognize that and do something about it, from gentle encouragement to retire to delaying the court calendar to encouraging Congress to impeach to other remedies I havenāt thought of.
Setting a hard age limit would also further confound the nomination and confirmation process. Having to consider at exactly what point during a future Presidential term a Justice will have to retire adds yet another factor that is not related to suitability for the position, and weāve got more than enough of those already.
(Seventy really isnāt all that old these days.)
ETA: Not to mention what it would do to Presidential elections! If it was known for sure that the next President would be appointing four Justices, or none at all (barring sudden death), that would have a dramatic and perhaps unwelcome effect on the election. For example, If no Justices were slated to be replaced by the next administration, the fear of Trump might be muted and let anti-HRC Democrats be just comfortable enough to stay home on November 8th. Whereas if there were three or four due to retire, even the most ardent Sandersnistas would have to hold their noses and vote for her.
2 Likes
Iād go 75 or 80 rather than 70. In many for-profit companies there is a mandatory retirement age for the chairman of the board, and 75 is the usual number.
There is a similar rule for Academics. sic transit gloria mundi.
1 Like
Among the functions of the The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is the design, construction, and maintenance of bridges (four to date). The Executive Director, the Chairman, and five of the ten Commissioners are lawyers. Two of the Commissioners are Engineers.
> The fact that Congress is flying blind, technologically speaking
Flying blind? No
Try āBeing led around by the nose by corporate lobbyists, big money donors, and Christian Dominionistsā
4 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
