Search results for query: *

That defeats half the purpose of having a Supreme Court. Anything that is important enough to reach SCOTUS is important enough that it should already be heard by the whole of the Court, not by a panel of justices. That also makes the law subject to luck of the draw and causes issues with...

You still need some turnover, effectively it ends up with 20 to 30 year "terms" and keeps the court a full generation behind current social trends. Besides, while extending physical survival almost indefinitely is likely to occur within the next few decades (at least for those with the...

I support age limits for Justices; turn eighty and you get to finish out the current term, then you are out. Term limits for judges just cause more problems than they solve though. Not to mention that they would require an amendment to the Constitution and thus aren't ever going to happen.