Only problem here is how you’d even go about electing U.S. Supreme Court members. Running Presidential races is bad enough, but running judicial contests nationally would be a nightmare. They’d have to raise obscene amounts of money in their capacity as Justices, and I can’t see that being a good thing. Another alternative would be dividing the country into 9 distinct districts and electing a candidate from each, but you’d still have the situation with the fundraising. Perhaps a better alternative would be requiring members to retire at 75 (in the case of Stevens, he’d would’ve been compelled to have stepped down in 1995 — interesting how the liberal media never talks much about a nearly 90 year old, senile moonbat making crucial decisions effecting our country. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe Stevens is the oldest SCOTUS member EVER).
If I were President, I’d line the court with strict Constructionist 30-somethings, assuring we’d have solid control of the court for half-a-century.
Stevens is 88, I think the oldest ever was Oliver Wendell Holmes who retired at age 91. But in terms of sheer "service" on the court, I bet Stevens has been a justice longer than Holmes.
You're right that a nationally election U.S. Supreme Court would likely cause them to spend obscene amounts of money though. I don't think they should be elected "at large" across the entire country like the President, but certainly they'd be conducting campaigns in several states at once. (the main flaw here is some unqualified zillionaire Oberweis/Huffington type in the legal community could win the primary and then lose to a RAT in the general)
I believe, interesting enough, that the 2004 campaign we had in my state for Illinois Supreme Court, 5th District, was the most expensive campaign for a state office in Illinois history, moreso than any Governor's race. But in the end, what matters is the good guy won, and if Blago had appointed someome to our court instead, he simply would have tossed a socialist sock-puppet into that seat for life.