The 18-year term limit is a good start, but what makes even more sense to me is the the regular scheduling of presidential SCOTUS justice nominations and the requirement that the senate take no more than 120 days to decide or else waive its right not to confirm.
It sounds like it would be a much more even balance of power, not just among the three branches but among administration’s, congresses, and courts over time.
It should probably require a constitutional amendment. The Supreme Court has been accused of both legislating from the bench and abdicating some of its responsibilities to Congress and state governments.
It’s not surprising after a cursory reading of Article III of the constitution. There’s a lot of judicial precedent and interpretation underlying the functions of government that aren’t obviously inferred from it. I feel like some of that should be formally codified in an amendment. I believe that was the original intent during the creation of the constitution, but it’s adaptive design features seem to be lacking for a few decades.
Unrelated, but there’s also a conspicuous absence of definitions, legal tests for or examples of what constitutes “good behavior” according to the constitution. An impeachable offense for one person may be businesses as usual for another as we have seen in Congress and the Presidency.
Having said all that, now is not a great time for amendments:
The 18-year term limit is a good start, but what makes even more sense to me is the the regular scheduling of presidential SCOTUS justice nominations and the requirement that the senate take no more than 120 days to decide or else waive its right not to confirm.
It sounds like it would be a much more even balance of power, not just among the three branches but among administration’s, congresses, and courts over time.
It should probably require a constitutional amendment. The Supreme Court has been accused of both legislating from the bench and abdicating some of its responsibilities to Congress and state governments.
It’s not surprising after a cursory reading of Article III of the constitution. There’s a lot of judicial precedent and interpretation underlying the functions of government that aren’t obviously inferred from it. I feel like some of that should be formally codified in an amendment. I believe that was the original intent during the creation of the constitution, but it’s adaptive design features seem to be lacking for a few decades.
Unrelated, but there’s also a conspicuous absence of definitions, legal tests for or examples of what constitutes “good behavior” according to the constitution. An impeachable offense for one person may be businesses as usual for another as we have seen in Congress and the Presidency.
Having said all that, now is not a great time for amendments: