General Discussion

clarice

(5,504 posts)

10. I was thinking more along these lines...

Fri Feb 28, 2014, 11:39 AM

Feb 2014

re: Term Limits.
As "The American Experience" is constantly evolving. Why would we want
anyone who's been in the same job for 30 years? It's not like they are appointed Kings...or is it?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

86 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Term limits and National elections for Supreme Court Justices? Your opinions please. nt [View all] clarice Feb 2014 OP

No judge or justice should ever be elected. Nye Bevan Feb 2014 #1

+ struggle4progress Feb 2014 #71

Not an idea I would support. hack89 Feb 2014 #2

Thank you for your kind words. nt clarice Feb 2014 #8

Nothing personal. I will change my post. nt hack89 Feb 2014 #9

LOL...I was kidding...it's all good ! nt clarice Feb 2014 #26

No...and neither do I.... clarice Feb 2014 #14

This message was self-deleted by its author Th1onein Feb 2014 #77

As much as I love politics, I want my judges to be non-partisan. joeglow3 Feb 2014 #3

With all respect..... clarice Feb 2014 #37

Exactly my point joeglow3 Feb 2014 #64

elected judges? Always a bad idea. bowens43 Feb 2014 #4

No to both. MineralMan Feb 2014 #5

They should last only as long as the President who appoints them is in office. Autumn Feb 2014 #6

Wow joeglow3 Feb 2014 #13

What? You think this supreme court has done well? Autumn Feb 2014 #18

My point exactly !!! Thanks. nt clarice Feb 2014 #22

All of them? onenote Feb 2014 #55

The ones that were there did well enough seeing as how Chimpy Autumn Feb 2014 #68

And I have heard people on the right say the EXACT SAME THING joeglow3 Feb 2014 #66

You think they did their job in 2000?? Autumn Feb 2014 #67

Probably not, but I have heard many on the left say they did a great job in 1973 joeglow3 Feb 2014 #73

What pissed you off in 73? Autumn Feb 2014 #75

Where did I say something pissed me off in 1973? joeglow3 Feb 2014 #80

You've mentioned 73 in 2 posts so I figured it meant something to you, Autumn Feb 2014 #82

How so? nt clarice Feb 2014 #19

If you completely removed the Supreme Court with each new president? joeglow3 Feb 2014 #65

Absolutely not. NuclearDem Feb 2014 #7

This ^ Adsos Letter Feb 2014 #51

A one-term limit of 20 years or so, maybe. But direct election? No. And make them Vincardog Feb 2014 #76

+100%. I was going to post the exact same thing! :) reformist2 Feb 2014 #79

I was thinking more along these lines... clarice Feb 2014 #10

Then the same should be applied to the executive and legislative branches of govt. smokey775 Feb 2014 #16

BINGO !!!! nt clarice Feb 2014 #24

Well, land-owning white males at least. NuclearDem Feb 2014 #40

Thanks for the reality check. GeorgeGist Feb 2014 #69

Excuse me but Washington was the richest man in the colonies. The founding FATHERS wanted Vincardog Mar 2014 #84

One should prefer a legal environment that doesn't vary with the winds struggle4progress Feb 2014 #72

Bad idea. smokey775 Feb 2014 #11

No. That would be a nightmare for us. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #12

Why do you think so? nt clarice Feb 2014 #15

I think social conservatives would be more motivated to get out the vote and we could hrmjustin Feb 2014 #21

I'm not so sure of that. We have been doing a good job of getting out the voters. nt clarice Feb 2014 #23

Personally I would rather not take the chance. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #25

I can see your point. nt clarice Feb 2014 #35

Do you mean like in 2010? YarnAddict Feb 2014 #46

No. Heck No. Hell No. Fuck No. cali Feb 2014 #17

Shouldn't Judges reflect the the will of the people under their jurisdiction? clarice Feb 2014 #20

The point of a republican (lower case r) government is to provide protections NuclearDem Feb 2014 #27

Good point. nt clarice Feb 2014 #31

No, they should reflect the will of the constitution. smokey775 Feb 2014 #29

Yup. nt clarice Feb 2014 #34

no. not even close. good grief. cali Feb 2014 #30

I'm not sure where you're coming from on this. Deep Breath. nt clarice Feb 2014 #32

I don't need a deep breath. Here's where I'm coming from: cali Feb 2014 #42

I'm not sure that it IS preferable...I was just wanting others opinions. NT clarice Feb 2014 #44

No. onenote Feb 2014 #58

No, the reason for it was so they could stay independent treestar Feb 2014 #28

Both are bad ideas. n/t Laelth Feb 2014 #33

So, staying under the current system, we are stuck with someone like C. Thomas forever !!! nt clarice Feb 2014 #36

Well, just until he retires or dies in office. smokey775 Feb 2014 #38

I think then, that my point is made. nt clarice Feb 2014 #39

If your point is that the Warren court, which was quite unpopular onenote Feb 2014 #60

Stuck? Yes, stuck with the great ones also....... suston96 Feb 2014 #45

We, the People at least fredamae Feb 2014 #41

Thank you. nt clarice Feb 2014 #43

And take the chance that a TeaBagger would be elected to the court? OregonBlue Feb 2014 #47

With judicial appointments, a citizen can at least pretend that a nominee was chosen on merit. Aristus Feb 2014 #48

With massive infusions of Corp. money thanks to Citizens United. smokey775 Feb 2014 #49

National Elections, hell no. Term Limits, absolutely. MicaelS Feb 2014 #50

Well if you want to open up interpretation of the constitution upaloopa Feb 2014 #52

My point exactly. smokey775 Feb 2014 #53

No and no. Bad idea for SC elections. Term limits already exist as elections. n/t FSogol Feb 2014 #54

Opposed to both badtoworse Feb 2014 #56

Term Limits, yes. enlightenment Feb 2014 #57

I'd like to see them limited to one 18 year term SwankyXomb Feb 2014 #59

I agree. nt clarice Feb 2014 #61

No. HereSince1628 Feb 2014 #62

We have term limits for various political offices in California. JDPriestly Feb 2014 #63

Ridiculous idea. They are already partisan enough. Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #70

No. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #74

Why? So the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson can buy them too? Hell no.... Rowdyboy Feb 2014 #78

There is no way customerserviceguy Feb 2014 #81

I like it the way it is. Calista241 Mar 2014 #83

No, emphatically. That's all we need, corporate money buying the fucking Supreme Court. eom TransitJohn Mar 2014 #85

Horrible idea. Lizzie Poppet Mar 2014 #86