I think that federal judges, including those on the Supreme Court, should have lifetime tenure. According to page 510 of the Edwards book, the Framers of the Constitution purposefully insulated federal judges from the influence of public opinion. I believe this relief from public pressure allows judges to make a more sound decision as an educated person of the law without outside influence.
While I understand the point made about federal judges having lifetime tenure, I respectively disagree. I think judges should serve for fixed amounts of time because in our world today, new perspectives and laws are changing rapidly, and we need to continue to bring fresh and new ideologies through the courts to keep up with our changing society. Also, as people get older, it is proven that their brains begin to deteriorate, therefore causing a lack of better judgement.
I agree with Mallory's statement that judges should have lifetime tenure. A lifetime tenure allows the judges to be relieved of public pressures for re-election so that they can focus on the cases that are happening in their court. Essentially this saves America time so that judges do not have to not do work so that they can work on their campaigns for judges.
I agree with Maggie that judges should not have lifetime tenure. I think that this causes the judges to become more set in their ways as time goes on and doesn't leave much of a chance for new opinions and ideas to be brought into the judicial system. As the judges get older they may also feel like they are just going through the motions, I think that federal judges should have limited tenure so that the judicial system can be refreshed with new faces, ideas, and opinions.
I agree with Eli. I think by giving judges life time terms it relieves them of public pressure and the idea that they have to do things so the public likes them. I think that it makes judges more likely to follow the law instead of following outside opinions. I also agree with Danielle when she says judges might get set in there ways but I also think that it allows judges to get experience. Also new opinions and ideas coming in and out of the Supreme Court might cause confusion.
I believe judges should serve life terms. While I understand both Danielle and Maggie's points I believe ceasing the life terms would create more problems. Such as who would get to reinstate judges would it be every eight years, or every presidents term? The people can not make it to seem as they are revoking one of the Presidents powers of selecting federal judges. Discussing how the laws continue to change and how we need fresh minds in the courts would bring the issue of judicial activism and restraint into the picture, creating many heated debates. As for the deteriorating of the mind, judges can be removed by their own choice but also if they are not upholding the "good behavior" clause. Judges have been removed from their seats for mental instability, intoxication, and abuse of power.
I think that federal judges, including those on the Supreme Court, should have lifetime tenure. According to page 510 of the Edwards book, the Framers of the Constitution purposefully insulated federal judges from the influence of public opinion. I believe this relief from public pressure allows judges to make a more sound decision as an educated person of the law without outside influence.
ReplyDeleteWhile I understand the point made about federal judges having lifetime tenure, I respectively disagree. I think judges should serve for fixed amounts of time because in our world today, new perspectives and laws are changing rapidly, and we need to continue to bring fresh and new ideologies through the courts to keep up with our changing society. Also, as people get older, it is proven that their brains begin to deteriorate, therefore causing a lack of better judgement.
DeleteI agree with Mallory's statement that judges should have lifetime tenure. A lifetime tenure allows the judges to be relieved of public pressures for re-election so that they can focus on the cases that are happening in their court. Essentially this saves America time so that judges do not have to not do work so that they can work on their campaigns for judges.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree with Maggie that judges should not have lifetime tenure. I think that this causes the judges to become more set in their ways as time goes on and doesn't leave much of a chance for new opinions and ideas to be brought into the judicial system. As the judges get older they may also feel like they are just going through the motions, I think that federal judges should have limited tenure so that the judicial system can be refreshed with new faces, ideas, and opinions.
DeleteI agree with Eli. I think by giving judges life time terms it relieves them of public pressure and the idea that they have to do things so the public likes them. I think that it makes judges more likely to follow the law instead of following outside opinions. I also agree with Danielle when she says judges might get set in there ways but I also think that it allows judges to get experience. Also new opinions and ideas coming in and out of the Supreme Court might cause confusion.
DeleteI believe judges should serve life terms. While I understand both Danielle and Maggie's points I believe ceasing the life terms would create more problems. Such as who would get to reinstate judges would it be every eight years, or every presidents term? The people can not make it to seem as they are revoking one of the Presidents powers of selecting federal judges. Discussing how the laws continue to change and how we need fresh minds in the courts would bring the issue of judicial activism and restraint into the picture, creating many heated debates. As for the deteriorating of the mind, judges can be removed by their own choice but also if they are not upholding the "good behavior" clause. Judges have been removed from their seats for mental instability, intoxication, and abuse of power.
Delete