Ted Cruz Ping! If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
Please beware, this is a high-volume ping list!
CRUZ or LOSE!
Posted on 06/27/2015 12:31:31 PM PDT by Unedited
Ted Cruz in a speech today proposed holding periodic Supreme Court judicial retention elections.
Ted Cruz Ping! If not now, when? If the current state of affairs isn’t justification for one, there is no such justification you’d ever accept, I suspect.
This is not a good idea, for the simple reason that greater democratization, like the 17th Amendment, tends to foul up the system and make officials *less* accountable.
The 17th turned the US senate into 100 “free agents”, who no longer have to do what their states want them to, as long as they can skunk voters every six years and frighten off their opponents.
So a better way would be to make federal judges accountable to congress at intervals. Not through impeachment, but through voting on their retention. If 2/3rds of the senate voted to not retain them as judges, then a simple majority of the House could remove them from the bench.
Notice this is just the opposite of impeachment, which is done with a simple majority in the House and confirmed by 2/3rds of the senate.
So many times I see folks urge a change in the retention for SCOTUS justices, for some reason never quite grasping that it could work against us too.
In the case of Roberts, I do think his actions merit an impeachment. As the Chief Justice it is up to him to ensure legislation from the bench doesn’t occur. If he can’t grasp that point, I do think he should be removed.
And in this instance, he instigated it, twice.
The man isn’t just a closet Leftist, he’s ignorant of the law and simply unqualified to continue in his position.
Further, review of what has taken place should be instituted, and several decisions by the court nullified, for lack of legal basis.
Maybe, they would. Which is why I think if any election or retention is to take place it should be accountable to a party with a consistent interest toward decentralization.
The only parties I know of in the US with such a vested interest would be our State legislators.
We may not be able to keep the whole system honest, but if we can keep it local we will still have our feet to keep ourselves free.
Hanging is more expedient; and more permanent.
No, this is as bad of an idea as 17A was, and the lawless will not follow the law anyway.
Without 17A, we would not have the monstrosity we do in all 3 branches of government.
What you said...
+1,000,000
we also need to put the senator elections back to the states- not national elections like they changed it to
When Americans embrace conservatism, that's when.
You want to let the country that's elected Obama twice amend the Constitution?
Oh, they'll amend it all right. Just not in the way people here are hoping.
So you’re saying, just give up, don’t try to make things better, let’s all wait for some nebulous future when everything has magically gotten better. Sorry, some of us think the principles this country was founded on are worth fighting for.
Or we can do it now and make things worse.
A Constitutional Convention at this time in America would be a disaster for conservatism. Not only would none of the grievances we currently have fail to be addressed, freedoms we already enjoy would likely get rolled back.
People here on this forum think this country is ready to pass an Amendment banning gay marriage? No chance. They'll probably pass an Amendment banning "racial and ethnic hate" or the Confederate flag, transgender discrimination, you name it. But if you think conservatives are going to win anything, you need to get outside more.
The constitution already allows for the Congress to impeach a judge. Since they won’t do it they want to pass it on to us.
Oh son, you also need to get out ans see the country a bit more. Your defeatism will never help things get better. Moaning about the current state of the country without being willing to do anything to try and change it for the better is pretty common around here, and is frankly a pretty distasteful thing to see. If you’re not willing to try, at least get out of the way of those who are.
Ted Cruz’s proposed amendment needs to go further. There should be no more lifetime appointments to the Federal bench and they should term limited as to how long they can serve.
I say a President can appoint someone to be a Federal judge for one ten year term. At the end of that term, they will have to either leave the bench or can be re-appointed to a second five year term by another President and reconfirmed by the Senate to either continue on as a circuit judge or promoted to an appellate court judge. When their combined 15 years are up, they must leave the bench.
For Supreme Court nominations, if confirmed by the the Senate, that justice can serve no longer than one twelve year term, either as an associate or Chief Justice. At the end of the twelve years, they must leave the court. At the six year mark, the Senate would have an option to remove the justice for whatever reason, but it would take a 3/5 vote of Senators present (60 out of 100 if all Senators present)
Incumbents would not be excempted from this amendment and if they have 15 or more years service on the bench, they would have l to leave office. Same for Supreme Court Judges. No more lifetime appointments.
I would leave it to the Senate to arrange an orderly system to replace term expired judges/justices with the longest serving leaving first.
I agree with making judges accountable. I don’t prefer retention elections, though.
I’d prefer a single, six or nine year term with candidates running against each other. I would end presidential appointments. Period. That way there would be politics involved, but judges are political no matter what anyone says.
9 years is long enough for anyone in that type of position of power. The turnover could be in classes, every 3 years, 3 judges would turn over, and 3 elections would be held.
One thing Scalia pointed out that sticks with me is his complaint that Scotus does not come from flyover country but from the coasts.
I would seriously consider having 9 regions of the country each of which elects one justice. That would ensure some type of diversity.
Whatever president would then get to appoint judges.
I agree that lifetime appointments to the federal bench should be done away with.
I differ from you a little bit. I would change the law to have them to serve one 10 year term, then be either replaced by a future president at the end of their 10 year term or re-nominated by a future president for one final 5 year term.
They must leave the federal bench after 15 years total service and cannot serve further, whether it be at the circuit or appeals level, with the exception of a Supreme Court Appointment.
If appointed and confirmed by the Senate to serve as a Supreme Court Justice, it will be limited to one 12 year term only. At the end of the 12 years they will be term limited and can no longer serve.
I would not exempt current judges from a new term limit amendment for the federal judiciary. I would leave it to the Senate to create an orderly replacement system for all federal judges with over 15 years on the bench, with the longest serving being the first replaced.
Same with the Supreme Court, replacing the 3 longest serving justices first, then every four years replace the next longest serving justices, then four years after that replace the last 3 justices. That way, three new justices could be nominated every four years ensuring fresh blood on the court. Maybe justices will rule differently on cases if they know they can only serve on the high court for 12 years total. (Disclosure: I got the Supreme Court idea from Mark Levin, but the 10 year term limit idea for the lower courts was mine.)
Though your idea of having the Supreme Court Justices elected by popular vote by geographic region does make some sense instead of having the justices all being from coastal areas. Maybe divide the country into 8 geographic regions and have the President appoint the chief justice directly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.