Life Tenures Pros And Cons

Words: 1458
Pages: 6

Article III of the Constitution states, “The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior . . ."1 Based off of this statement in the Constitution, it is clear that the Framers’ intention was to have the judges in the judicial branch to serve life tenures to remain completely independent from political influence. But the 21st century culture that we are living in has changed radically from the culture that the Framers had molded the Constitution around in the 1700s. In current society, life tenures bring many problems to the judicial branch, such as long-standing judges who are unfamiliar with many of the topics they are ruling on, as well as politically charged appointments due to the rare occurrence …show more content…
That solution is an amendment that proposes that a president shall maintain the right to appoint the judge and have the Senate approve he or she, but the term limit would be shortened from life service to ten years, with eligibility of reappointment. This proposal will reap many benefits on the American people, such as a regular injection of new ideas to the Supreme Court every ten years to more accurately reflect the ideals of Americans, as well as maintaining the cherished checks and balances by having the president appoint and having the Senate approve the judge. This change to the Constitution will allow the infusion of fresh ideas on the judicial bench as well as to keep the Framers’ original intention of maintaining judicial independence …show more content…
With vacancies on the bench so rare due to the current life tenure, when a federal judge does retire, it is a political frenzy filled with strategic behavior by judges and presidents. Presidents try to maintain their influence into the future by typically choosing a young appointee who can serve for upwards of thirty years on the bench. Young federal judges are problematic according to Federalist 78, which states that judges must endure "long and laborious study" to prepare themselves for dealing with "the variety of controversies which grow out of the folly and wickedness of mankind”6. Throwing a judge onto the bench who might not yet have the experience necessary for such a demanding position simply to prolong an individual party’s influence in the judiciary could lead to resulting decisions that lack the knowledge necessary for an informed and fair conclusion. By instituting ten year fixed terms for judges, there would be less political pressure to appoint a younger judge to prolong influence since the term can only be ten years. This would maximize the pool of candidates to ensure that the judge appointed was chosen based off of his or her credentials and experience, not just because they will serve their party for an extended time on the bench. An example of these political