The framers did this because they believed--laughably--that the supreme court was to be the most reliable protector and guardian of individual rights and Constitutional law. Yeah, I know, it's a gut-buster. I think there's a good belly laugh in every paragraph of Hamilton's Federalist 78, on this very subject.
I think you are quite wrong to suggest that good behavior was understood to mean that any time a judge decided unpopularly--rightly or wrongly so---that he could be impeached. Unless you could prove that a decision was based upon a bribe or some other tangible form of corruption, you'd be claiming a right to impeach for poor judgement. That's not what it means. You will protest that you don't mean to say impeach a judge when a decision is unpopular. But impeachment is a political act, performed by elected bodies. You think they would impeach based upon a popular decision?
Under your scheme, every decision of the court becomes a political question--precisely what the framers sought to avoid. No decision would be safe until tested in the House. Which judges would be impeached? What judge would write a controversial opinion? Would Scalia have been impeached by a Democrat house? Thomas?
The framers wanted a judiciary that was free from the whims of the democratic branches. And in a way, they got it. Sitting judges needn't fear the other branches. They bring enough political baggage on their own.
My point, which is irrefutable, is that the SCOTUS has been anything BUT what the framers' thought it would be. 200 years of data is enough for me. Article 3, especially when combined with the flabby language and implied powers found elsewhere in the Constitution, is a fatal flaw. It will simply NEVER do what we want it do until it is fixed.
The 10th amendment should be scrapped, and replaced with the earlier version that failed to pass--the one that said those powers not EXPRESSLY DELEGATED to the US belonged to the states or the people.
The necessary and proper clause should be stricken.
The words "general welfare" should be removed. In fact, the entire preamble should be lined-out.
Obviously, the commerce clause has to go too.
Constitutional review should be totally re-worked.
Most of the Bill of Rights could be improved. The 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendments in particular could be clarified and simplified in a way that would render them more stable.
I mean, when you look at it honestly, the Constitution is a bloody mess. Full of errors, large and small.
You know what it means to say supreme court justices will serve during good behavior? It's the quaint old way of saying it's a lifetime appointment. And why were they given life tenure? To secure their independence from the other branches, and from the democratic will.The framing fathers were anything but naive. Good behaviour was always meant to be upholding civil conduct to the position while avoiding all high crimes and misdemeanors. It's one of those "self evident" terms, something purely analytical folks have troubles grasping. They try to attempt to embellish on it when it says what it means and means what it says. When we were 5 years old we were told by our mommies and Kindergarten teacher to be on our "best behavior". I believe we know this means: "don't do anything illegal or stupid". The framing fathers never put term limits on any position. They didn't say Congress couldn't limit terms either.
The 10th amendment should be scrapped, and replaced with the earlier version that failed to pass--the one that said those powers not EXPRESSLY DELEGATED to the US belonged to the states or the people.Why? The doctrine is plenty sufficient for all intents and purposes as it is. It sounds like you would like to see the states having more sovereign authority. If that's the case, you should be looking at Amendment XIV. It ultimately gave the federal regime more sovereign power as it ensured anything at the federal level was forced down the throats of the states, including the Bill of Rights, all tax structures, currency, and any other Constitutional statute limiting federal power prior to its ratification.