▲ 1520 ▼ Senate Democrats introduce bill to implement term limits and biannual appointments to Supreme Court (www.washingtonexaminer.com) submitted 2 years ago by Veedem@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world 163 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 122 points 2 years ago (6 children) How about term limits in congress too? permalink fedilink source hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] Veedem@lemmy.world [S] 100 points 2 years ago (1 child) I’m all for that too, but at least they can be voted out of office. Supreme Court Justices are appointed (which I’m ok with because I don’t want them campaigning) for life. Once they’re there, they never have to leave. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ThePantser@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (4 children) Do the justices get protection like the president? Seems like they should have better protection since they are lifers while the president is only max 8 years. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 26 points 2 years ago (2 children) Like all federal court officials, they are protected by US Marshals permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 2 years ago I only just learned about this when I started a new gubment job. Wild stuff. Now, as to what really needs to happen here, Thomas, at the very least, should face corruption and bribery charges. Maybe conspiracy to commit, too. permalink fedilink source parent [–] spider@lemmy.nz 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) they are protected by US Marshals I'm assuming after this? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 4 points 2 years ago Federal judges sometimes don't want protection around them and it's not like the Secret Service and the President. While the Secret Service can tell the President what must happen, the Marshals can't mandate protection details. But, when things like that happen, they certainly do. permalink fedilink source parent [–] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) The idea was to ensure that the court never became political. This obviously didn’t work out, but the framers had good intentions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ephemeral_gibbon@aussie.zone 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) If they wanted that it shouldn't have been appointed by a political party permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago There were no political parties and they literally believed that none would ever form. They created the US government based on the idea that parties would never exist. Naive, obviously. permalink fedilink source parent [–] brawleryukon@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) while the president is only max 8 years. 10, technically, but it doesn't change your point. Just felt like doing an ackshully. #sorrynotsorry permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) 10? i thought as long as they didnt get the majority of the term they could keep going (so thereoretically infinite) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brawleryukon@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago* (3 children) Per the 22nd Amendment, someone who has held the office for more than two years of someone else's elected term is limited to a single elected term of their own. So if you've done two or fewer, you are still eligible to be elected twice. Those two initial years plus your two elected terms would be ten years. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] ripcord@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago Also there's the whole non-consecutive term thing. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago okay so just serve 1.99 of the terms of multiple other people and you have infinite terms permalink fedilink source parent [–] evatronic@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago Technically, 9 and 364/365 years, give or take a day for leap year(s). permalink fedilink source parent [–] loopedcandle@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 2 years ago The US Marshalls provide their protection. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SCB@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (1 child) We elect House members every 2 years and Senate every 6, whereas Supreme Court justices are lifetime appointments This is comparing apples and plastic bottles permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Zorque@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago I feel like regulations on plastic bottles are just as useful as regulations on apples, even if the regulations are a bit different. Just because two things are different doesn't mean they can't have something in common. permalink fedilink source parent [–] aircooledJenkins@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (2 children) Fix election rules, campaign finances and gerrymandering and congress will get sorted out. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Couldn't the same be said for the supreme court? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aircooledJenkins@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) No. Supreme Court Justices are not elected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago But the article says some of those reasons are why this law is needed. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Techmaster@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago It's almost too easy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Weirdly enough, that was actually one of the things Trump campaigned on. Just about the only thing I've ever agreed with him on, and I don't like the feeling lol. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Zorque@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago He campaigned on a lot of things he never had any intention of following up on. I wouldn't take that as a sign that he actually agreed with the sentiment. permalink fedilink source parent [–] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) And all their salaries should be decided by the people. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Ironically, one of the few explicit stipulations in the constitution about the supreme court says their salary cannot be reduced during their time in office. permalink fedilink source parent [–] blady_blah@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Sounds great in principle but the reality is that the problem is lobbying and money in politics, not politicians who stay in office too long. Term limits tend to give lobbyists more power because they can "guide" the new politicians more easily if a given percentage of them are always new. The problem is the money. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Veedem@lemmy.world [S] 100 points 2 years ago (1 child) I’m all for that too, but at least they can be voted out of office. Supreme Court Justices are appointed (which I’m ok with because I don’t want them campaigning) for life. Once they’re there, they never have to leave. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ThePantser@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (4 children) Do the justices get protection like the president? Seems like they should have better protection since they are lifers while the president is only max 8 years. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 26 points 2 years ago (2 children) Like all federal court officials, they are protected by US Marshals permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 2 years ago I only just learned about this when I started a new gubment job. Wild stuff. Now, as to what really needs to happen here, Thomas, at the very least, should face corruption and bribery charges. Maybe conspiracy to commit, too. permalink fedilink source parent [–] spider@lemmy.nz 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) they are protected by US Marshals I'm assuming after this? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 4 points 2 years ago Federal judges sometimes don't want protection around them and it's not like the Secret Service and the President. While the Secret Service can tell the President what must happen, the Marshals can't mandate protection details. But, when things like that happen, they certainly do. permalink fedilink source parent [–] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) The idea was to ensure that the court never became political. This obviously didn’t work out, but the framers had good intentions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ephemeral_gibbon@aussie.zone 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) If they wanted that it shouldn't have been appointed by a political party permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago There were no political parties and they literally believed that none would ever form. They created the US government based on the idea that parties would never exist. Naive, obviously. permalink fedilink source parent [–] brawleryukon@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) while the president is only max 8 years. 10, technically, but it doesn't change your point. Just felt like doing an ackshully. #sorrynotsorry permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) 10? i thought as long as they didnt get the majority of the term they could keep going (so thereoretically infinite) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brawleryukon@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago* (3 children) Per the 22nd Amendment, someone who has held the office for more than two years of someone else's elected term is limited to a single elected term of their own. So if you've done two or fewer, you are still eligible to be elected twice. Those two initial years plus your two elected terms would be ten years. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] ripcord@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago Also there's the whole non-consecutive term thing. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago okay so just serve 1.99 of the terms of multiple other people and you have infinite terms permalink fedilink source parent [–] evatronic@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago Technically, 9 and 364/365 years, give or take a day for leap year(s). permalink fedilink source parent [–] loopedcandle@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 2 years ago The US Marshalls provide their protection. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ThePantser@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (4 children) Do the justices get protection like the president? Seems like they should have better protection since they are lifers while the president is only max 8 years. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 26 points 2 years ago (2 children) Like all federal court officials, they are protected by US Marshals permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 2 years ago I only just learned about this when I started a new gubment job. Wild stuff. Now, as to what really needs to happen here, Thomas, at the very least, should face corruption and bribery charges. Maybe conspiracy to commit, too. permalink fedilink source parent [–] spider@lemmy.nz 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) they are protected by US Marshals I'm assuming after this? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 4 points 2 years ago Federal judges sometimes don't want protection around them and it's not like the Secret Service and the President. While the Secret Service can tell the President what must happen, the Marshals can't mandate protection details. But, when things like that happen, they certainly do. permalink fedilink source parent [–] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) The idea was to ensure that the court never became political. This obviously didn’t work out, but the framers had good intentions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ephemeral_gibbon@aussie.zone 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) If they wanted that it shouldn't have been appointed by a political party permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago There were no political parties and they literally believed that none would ever form. They created the US government based on the idea that parties would never exist. Naive, obviously. permalink fedilink source parent [–] brawleryukon@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) while the president is only max 8 years. 10, technically, but it doesn't change your point. Just felt like doing an ackshully. #sorrynotsorry permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) 10? i thought as long as they didnt get the majority of the term they could keep going (so thereoretically infinite) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brawleryukon@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago* (3 children) Per the 22nd Amendment, someone who has held the office for more than two years of someone else's elected term is limited to a single elected term of their own. So if you've done two or fewer, you are still eligible to be elected twice. Those two initial years plus your two elected terms would be ten years. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] ripcord@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago Also there's the whole non-consecutive term thing. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago okay so just serve 1.99 of the terms of multiple other people and you have infinite terms permalink fedilink source parent [–] evatronic@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago Technically, 9 and 364/365 years, give or take a day for leap year(s). permalink fedilink source parent [–] loopedcandle@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 2 years ago The US Marshalls provide their protection. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 26 points 2 years ago (2 children) Like all federal court officials, they are protected by US Marshals permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 2 years ago I only just learned about this when I started a new gubment job. Wild stuff. Now, as to what really needs to happen here, Thomas, at the very least, should face corruption and bribery charges. Maybe conspiracy to commit, too. permalink fedilink source parent [–] spider@lemmy.nz 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) they are protected by US Marshals I'm assuming after this? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 4 points 2 years ago Federal judges sometimes don't want protection around them and it's not like the Secret Service and the President. While the Secret Service can tell the President what must happen, the Marshals can't mandate protection details. But, when things like that happen, they certainly do. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 2 years ago I only just learned about this when I started a new gubment job. Wild stuff. Now, as to what really needs to happen here, Thomas, at the very least, should face corruption and bribery charges. Maybe conspiracy to commit, too. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] spider@lemmy.nz 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) they are protected by US Marshals I'm assuming after this? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 4 points 2 years ago Federal judges sometimes don't want protection around them and it's not like the Secret Service and the President. While the Secret Service can tell the President what must happen, the Marshals can't mandate protection details. But, when things like that happen, they certainly do. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 4 points 2 years ago Federal judges sometimes don't want protection around them and it's not like the Secret Service and the President. While the Secret Service can tell the President what must happen, the Marshals can't mandate protection details. But, when things like that happen, they certainly do. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) The idea was to ensure that the court never became political. This obviously didn’t work out, but the framers had good intentions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ephemeral_gibbon@aussie.zone 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) If they wanted that it shouldn't have been appointed by a political party permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago There were no political parties and they literally believed that none would ever form. They created the US government based on the idea that parties would never exist. Naive, obviously. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ephemeral_gibbon@aussie.zone 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) If they wanted that it shouldn't have been appointed by a political party permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago There were no political parties and they literally believed that none would ever form. They created the US government based on the idea that parties would never exist. Naive, obviously. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago There were no political parties and they literally believed that none would ever form. They created the US government based on the idea that parties would never exist. Naive, obviously. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] brawleryukon@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) while the president is only max 8 years. 10, technically, but it doesn't change your point. Just felt like doing an ackshully. #sorrynotsorry permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) 10? i thought as long as they didnt get the majority of the term they could keep going (so thereoretically infinite) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brawleryukon@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago* (3 children) Per the 22nd Amendment, someone who has held the office for more than two years of someone else's elected term is limited to a single elected term of their own. So if you've done two or fewer, you are still eligible to be elected twice. Those two initial years plus your two elected terms would be ten years. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] ripcord@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago Also there's the whole non-consecutive term thing. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago okay so just serve 1.99 of the terms of multiple other people and you have infinite terms permalink fedilink source parent [–] evatronic@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago Technically, 9 and 364/365 years, give or take a day for leap year(s). permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) 10? i thought as long as they didnt get the majority of the term they could keep going (so thereoretically infinite) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brawleryukon@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago* (3 children) Per the 22nd Amendment, someone who has held the office for more than two years of someone else's elected term is limited to a single elected term of their own. So if you've done two or fewer, you are still eligible to be elected twice. Those two initial years plus your two elected terms would be ten years. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] ripcord@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago Also there's the whole non-consecutive term thing. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago okay so just serve 1.99 of the terms of multiple other people and you have infinite terms permalink fedilink source parent [–] evatronic@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago Technically, 9 and 364/365 years, give or take a day for leap year(s). permalink fedilink source parent
[–] brawleryukon@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago* (3 children) Per the 22nd Amendment, someone who has held the office for more than two years of someone else's elected term is limited to a single elected term of their own. So if you've done two or fewer, you are still eligible to be elected twice. Those two initial years plus your two elected terms would be ten years. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] ripcord@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago Also there's the whole non-consecutive term thing. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago okay so just serve 1.99 of the terms of multiple other people and you have infinite terms permalink fedilink source parent [–] evatronic@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago Technically, 9 and 364/365 years, give or take a day for leap year(s). permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ripcord@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago Also there's the whole non-consecutive term thing. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago okay so just serve 1.99 of the terms of multiple other people and you have infinite terms permalink fedilink source parent
[–] evatronic@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago Technically, 9 and 364/365 years, give or take a day for leap year(s). permalink fedilink source parent
[–] loopedcandle@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 2 years ago The US Marshalls provide their protection. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SCB@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (1 child) We elect House members every 2 years and Senate every 6, whereas Supreme Court justices are lifetime appointments This is comparing apples and plastic bottles permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Zorque@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago I feel like regulations on plastic bottles are just as useful as regulations on apples, even if the regulations are a bit different. Just because two things are different doesn't mean they can't have something in common. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Zorque@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago I feel like regulations on plastic bottles are just as useful as regulations on apples, even if the regulations are a bit different. Just because two things are different doesn't mean they can't have something in common. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] aircooledJenkins@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (2 children) Fix election rules, campaign finances and gerrymandering and congress will get sorted out. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Couldn't the same be said for the supreme court? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aircooledJenkins@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) No. Supreme Court Justices are not elected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago But the article says some of those reasons are why this law is needed. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Techmaster@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago It's almost too easy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Couldn't the same be said for the supreme court? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] aircooledJenkins@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) No. Supreme Court Justices are not elected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago But the article says some of those reasons are why this law is needed. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] aircooledJenkins@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) No. Supreme Court Justices are not elected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago But the article says some of those reasons are why this law is needed. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago But the article says some of those reasons are why this law is needed. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Weirdly enough, that was actually one of the things Trump campaigned on. Just about the only thing I've ever agreed with him on, and I don't like the feeling lol. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Zorque@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago He campaigned on a lot of things he never had any intention of following up on. I wouldn't take that as a sign that he actually agreed with the sentiment. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Zorque@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago He campaigned on a lot of things he never had any intention of following up on. I wouldn't take that as a sign that he actually agreed with the sentiment. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) And all their salaries should be decided by the people. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Ironically, one of the few explicit stipulations in the constitution about the supreme court says their salary cannot be reduced during their time in office. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bhmnscmm@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Ironically, one of the few explicit stipulations in the constitution about the supreme court says their salary cannot be reduced during their time in office. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] blady_blah@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Sounds great in principle but the reality is that the problem is lobbying and money in politics, not politicians who stay in office too long. Term limits tend to give lobbyists more power because they can "guide" the new politicians more easily if a given percentage of them are always new. The problem is the money. permalink fedilink source parent