Potential Supreme Court Justices need to be a voter issue

Smart guys but, hey, we can't expect them to be right 100% of the time, right?

I appreciate the argument for having them independent, but you get that by making them appointments instead of elected. And, as long as they are not subject to re-appointment or dismissal, they'd remain independent. If you want some timelessness, you can make the terms of office long -- 10 years or 20 years or whatever, with no second term.

But, with lifetime appointments, the entire nation is guessing at when a handful of men might die and using that guess to help pick a president. That's not good governance. If you had a term, you could know with certainty (mostly) who would need replacing in each presidential term. Moreover, you could stagger appointments so that you don't have a single president recreating the whole Court because he was lucky enough to have a bunch of Justices die on his watch.

 

At least they should test them make sure they aren't senile and still know what they are ruling on.

 

Palin is potentially one heart beat away from appointing the next Supreme Court Justice(s) and she apparently doesn't know any court case besides Roe

http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/

"Of concern to McCain's campaign, however, is a remaining and still-undisclosed clip from Palin's interview with Couric last week that has the political world buzzing.

The Palin aide, after first noting how "infuriating" it was for CBS to purportedly leak word about the gaffe, revealed that it came in response to a question about Supreme Court decisions.

After noting Roe vs. Wade, Palin was apparently unable to discuss any major court cases.

There was no verbal fumbling with this particular question as there was with some others, the aide said, but rather silence."

 

....or not.....signed FDR.