Should the Supreme Court be reformed?

[roscoe]

Kind of a tough pull. All federal judgeships are lifetime appointments, specifically to avoid political pressure on the judiciary. That is right in Article 3 of the US Constitution.

 

[wiscoaster]

That's why it would require an amendment.

 

[roscoe]

Well, I must say, the Democrats would agree with you. They have recently become somewhat jaded on the whole 'lifetime appointments' thing.

 

[Howland937]

Very, very recently...

 

[roscoe]

Yeah - that's the way that rolls. As in, be careful what you wish for . . .

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

No. I don't agree.

There are several issues I have with this, but most importantly you have not demonstrated how your proposals would be an improvement.

Any discussion on this must, of necessity, involve an in-depth discussion of all the facets behind the existing structure as well. You can't discuss changes without doing this such that the proposed changes can be critiqued appropriately.

Anything we can come up with can, and will, be politically twisted/undermined in some way, shape, or form. That's what politicians do...it's inherent in the beast.

If the proposed changes are to address political manipulation of the system, we need all this.

 

[doubleh]

Leave the Supreme court alone. ANYTHING the current politicians dream up will be to the nation's detriment. Also courts and regulator agencies should never be appointed. All you get by that method is the hacks that the current administration doing the appointing want that will talking dummies for the appointers. We just got that in my state for the Public Regulation Commission. All the regulation done will be what the governor and her cronies want, not what is good for the state. It works the same at any level of government. The one's in power will pack whatever body they appoint members to that will do their bidding to enhance their power over the citizens.