Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: r_barton

Congress doesn’t need to expand the number of judges. FDR tried that and as popular as he was at the time, he failed. What they should do is urge the states to pass an amendment that limits judges to, say, ten years on the bench, or twelve. When the founders wrote the constitution, the average life expectancy was about 50 years. They had no way of knowing that 200 years later judges would be sitting on the bench well into their 80’s. of course, Democrats would fight that idea.


19 posted on 02/14/2016 11:14:04 AM PST by Doche2X2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Doche2X2
Life expectancy may have been about 50 in 1787, but the men who lived long enough to be nominated to the Court tended to beat the average.

Of the first four Chief Justices, John Jay, Oliver Ellsworth, John Marshall, and Roger Taney, only Ellsworth died young (about 62). Just looking at their years of birth and death and not their actual birthdays, it appears Jay lived to 84, Marshall to 80, and Taney to 87.

(I'm ignoring John Rutledge, named as Jay's successor, whose nomination was rejected by the Senate.)

33 posted on 02/14/2016 11:43:33 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson