[Cletus.D.Yokel]

I think one of the questions that needs to be asked is, “were the fathers smart enough to know that the world changes and something they found requisite in their time may need APPROPRIATE change in (their) future.”

This is not a “living document argument” as we have had several Amendments in the intervening years.

Take for instance, the 17th Amendment. Prior to it, Senators were chosen by the State Houses. It was a “populous” amendment that had coattails with the women’s sufferage movement.

Now, I’d rather it had not been done put, I peer back through the smoky lenses of confirmation bias (no pun intended).

What is being discussed should assessed against that question. Would the Fathers enter into a discussion of SCOTUS service limits?

[greeneyes]

What is being discussed should assessed against that question. Would the Fathers enter into a discussion of SCOTUS service limits?
***********************************************************************************
To me, length of service is not the issue. The issue is legislating from the bench and the resulting disruption of the balance of power.

IIRC, from reading the minutes of the Constitutional Convention etc. a few years ago, the Judiciary was supposed to be the least powerful-not the supreme dictators by committee that they have become.

Just my 2 cents.

[Wneighbor]

Take for instance, the 17th Amendment. Prior to it, Senators were chosen by the State Houses. It was a “populous” amendment that had coattails with the women’s sufferage movement.

The 17th must be repealed. Constitutionally it converted part of "republic" to "democracy." Just what the left wants. Removed representation of the states as entities. I know you know this Clete but many don't. Vital topic to our republic and I gotta leave for the day for maskless ministry at the public park. Repealing the 17th needs doing.