They need to start with the legislative branch first
C@LAg said:
Hungry Ojos said:
The bill's sponsors reads like a "who's who" of ****ing idiots.
ThunderCougarFalconBird said:
Unfortunately that requires a constitutional amendment.
They'll just have Nancy rip it in half....that'll work!Rapier108 said:
Not going to happen. They would need to amend Article III Section 1.
C@LAg said:
I do wonder how the SC judges would react to this. publicly.
also convenient first two to go are Republican judges. Funny how that works.
Hell yes. Add a rider that it applies to the House and Senate and go ahead.Bigballin said:
They need to start with the legislative branch first
C@LAg said:
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3575349-democrats-introduce-bill-to-enact-term-limits-for-supreme-court-justices/
A group of House Democrats introduced a bill on Tuesday to enact term limits for Supreme Court justices, arguing that the move will "restore legitimacy and independence to the nation's highest court."
The legislation, titled the Supreme Court Tenure Establishment and Retirement Modernization (TERM) Act, would authorize the president to nominate Supreme Court justices every two years in the first and third years after a presidential election. The justices who have been on the court the longest will be moved to senior status first.
If confirmed by the Senate, those individuals would serve a maximum 18 years on the bench. After their tenure is complete, the Supreme Court justices would retire from active service and assume senior status.
Justices on the bench at the time of the bill's enactment would switch to senior status one-by-one as justices are confirmed to the bench in the first and third years after a presidential election.
Under senior status, justices will still hold their office on the Supreme Court, which includes official duties and pay. If the number of justices dips below nine at some point because of a vacancy, disability or disqualification the justice who most recently attained senior status would serve as the ninth associate justice.
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) introduced the bill, along with Reps. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), David Cicilline (D-R.I.), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), Karen Bass (D-Calif.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) as co-sponsors.
Just the fact these pathetic, unethical, amoral idiots introduced this bill exposes they have not read the Constitution, let alone believe in he Constitution. Somewhere at some time weren't these miscreants obligated to swear an oath of office to uphold the Constitution?Ag87H2O said:
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) introduced the bill, along with Reps. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), David Cicilline (D-R.I.), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), Karen Bass (D-Calif.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) as co-sponsors.
Tells you all you need to know. It's like a Who's Who list of congressional idiots.