Interested in the pros and cons if Congress changes from lifetime to term limit for Supreme Court??
The Chicago Tribune – St. Louis Post Dispatch Editorial article titled: About Term Limits for Supreme Court, stated that after 245 years, that, “Supreme Court is broken.”
The Purpose of This Post
Is to relate this conundrum to an ancient wisdom proverb and an idiom for all voters and legislators to “digest” the pros and cons of this editorial…
King Solomon
My son, eat thou honey, because it is good; and the honeycomb, which is sweet to thy taste: (Proverb 24:13)
Excerpt – Biblehub Commentaries
Then there shall be a reward — As nothing is more necessary for thee, nothing more delightful; so, if it be seriously studied, and thoroughly digested,
Idiom – What good for the goose is good for the gander
Meaning – If something is good, acceptable, or beneficial for one person, it is or should be equally so for another person or persons as well.
What’s My Point?
Every attempt to obtain term limits to date in Illinois has never been successful because legislators believe that every election should be decided by voters. However, anyone who ever experienced running for any election to unseat an incumbent knows how almost impossible it is because every incumbent automatically has the advantage because he or she once elected appoints an army of voters whose jobs depend on the incumbent.
In My Opinion
I would support the proposal for the Supreme Court is it would apply to every elected legislator because of what I learned from experience how hard it is to unseat an incumbent in a local election who was guaranteed a 15,000-vote advantage of employees, from their employee’s families, friends and vendors over any challenger.
And like the idiom states “what’s good for the goose (President and now Supreme Court) is good for the gander (all legislators) to emulate what George Washington did after his two terms in office in the 1700 rd.
In other words, it is hypocritical for legislators to want to do it only “sweet to their taste” according to King Solomons proverb.
If Interested
Read the Source Links below which include an article of the pros and cons and history of the reasons why founders wanted the Supreme Court to be appointed for lifetimes/
“That was put into the Constitution to preserve the total independence of the judiciary…. To free justices from partisan politics.”
You Decide
Are term limits wise or foolish for our Nation long term interests or to satisfy the current administrators wish to “sweeten up their taste of what they want for the goose but not the gander?
Regards and goodwill blogging.
Source Links
Chicago Tribune
Biblehub Commentaries Proverb 24:13
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/proverbs/24-13.htm
Idioms
https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/what%27s+good+for+the+goose+is+good+for+the+gander
Northeastern Education = Pros and Cons
Rudy u Martinka 
The entire premise of a SCOTUS term limit is the kneejerk to a stacked court representing one party more than another… “forever”. That’s obvious. The idea that the Founders presumed no term limit in order to insulate the justices from politics is a valid one. If a term limit be considered I would think it would be age related… maybe 75. If one wants to consider a “years” limitation.. then make it 10 to 20 to carry any specific member well beyond any current political event and/or volatile opinion cycle of a given point in time in order to “dilute” their political importance of a possible biased rendered decision. But that’s not 100 %.
Populist issues of abortion seldom change over time. Populist issues of gun owners/control flex with the changing times and technologies.
LikeLike
Doug, you stated
“If a term limit be considered I would think it would be age related… maybe 75. If one wants to consider a “year’s” limitation.”
75? You young whippersnapper.
I’m only 81
I retired at 62 because I was wise enough to take King Solomon’s advice:
“Do not wear yourself out making wealth, be discerning enough to give it up. (Proverb 23:4)
What the Supreme Court judges are not doing should be considered as work.
They are having a ball hoping using their wisdom talents to straighined out the mess we keep getting into because of young whippersnappers foolish decisions.
I bet if they were paid minimum wages they would never retire because they enjoy having the honor and fun of what they are doing.
Regards and goodwill blogging.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, that’s fine. But I’m talking about a forced retirement age of 75 as simply one possible alternative to setting a term limit in years. Has nothing to do in the amount of “work” they are alleged to be doing or not. It also has nothing to do with this people who manage to live into their 80’s+ either because they kept themselves in shape or have outstanding genetics that compensated for a life of abusing one’s body… or have managed to avoid the natural pitfalls of mental deterioration at the advanced ages.
Hey.. I’m “only” 70 but I already notice some people treating me differently, albeit slight in most cases. The staff where I work are reluctant to ask me to move stuff around.. yet I tend to not look my age by ten years younger (still have hair)… and I am perfectly ambulatory without some noticeable gait. The other day an old guy came into the lobby and as we were chatting came up and asked me why I was still working. So apparently I look old enough to be retired. The fact I have this job at all is in essence because my past career doesn’t want old people…. so I am out to pasture. I work for two reasons… it gives me a bit of purpose in life as well as a supplemental income for a while longer. Also… I know a fair number of people who retired and died within three years.
We all have different reasons. I never in my life worked for wealth. Yes, I worked to make money and to raise a family and survive in life… but the big takeaway to me was satisfaction in what I was doing. My entrepreneurship gave me a sense of having created something from nothing. Does all that make me better than anyone else? Of course not. I just did it differently for me alone.
As for SCOTUS retirement at something like 75… there’s a common sense that advancing age does in fact lead to medical conditions which can cause distractions, and possible senility is a risk as well. Not everyone who ages has good genetics. As for “old and wise”.. your life wisdom has been accumulated and cemented by time we are in our 50’s and 60’s.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Doug,
You stated: “As for SCOTUS retirement at something like 75”…
There is a difference in energy needed to be President of the USA and a Supreme Courrt Justice.
In my opinion, from just Biden’s appearance walking, he lacks energy. I wonder if he could pass a standard cognitive test.
I am still trying to understand what he has accomplished in his first ten months term other than to reverse every accomplishment sf Trump.
What say you, what has Biden accomplished in his ten months in office?
Don’t bring up Covid because for some reason, he did nothing to prevent the Delta variant spread from India, England, and Africa to enter the USA, and waited far too long to mandate Federal employees to be vaccinated,
There are still large percentages of Democrats who even though have no medical or religious reasons still refuse to be vaccinated..
At ;least Trump set travel; restroctopms immediately in early Covid from China and other countries, which Biden opposed, and in my opinion allowed the Delta to spread into the USA.
And even admitted that many refugees were allowed to enter the Soother border without being tested for Covid and, who knows what else to enter and fly on commercial airlines all over the USA.
Regards and goodwill blogging.
LikeLike
Thanks for the insight. Perhaps we could have term limits for Federal, State and local that was consistent for all.
Blessings.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good post! I had not made the connection between term limits for the Supreme Court and Congress.
LikeLike