Ending Lifetime Federal Court Apppointments

Last week, in this post, I highlighted 10 major flaws I believe have developed today in the US Constitution.

The second flaw I mentioned is the Constitution's lifetime appointment for federal judges, especially to the Supreme Court.

A little historical perspective and arithmetic illuminates this subject. Back in the 1780s, average male life expectancy was somewhere around 35. You can probably add 10-15 years when controlling for education, wealth and profession. That is, the better-educated, wealthier, less agrarian men probably lived longer due to better hygiene, knowledge of healthier habits, easier work environments, etc.

Plus, the average had to be depressed from the effect of so many uneducated farmers and frontiersmen who met with early or untimely deaths in a very rugged and dangerous environment.

Figure a lawyer or respected community figure would probably not be appointed to a federal court until in his 30s. Perhaps his 40s for the Supreme Court.

As an example, consider the nation's fourth Chief Justice, John Marshall. After a legislative and cabinet career, he ascended to the Supreme Court at the age of 46, serving until his death in 1835, at the age of 80.

Our Founding Father's probably didn't think a lot about lifetime careers in federal office. After all, they had lives to live, businesses to attend to, fortunes to make. Nobody probably gave serious consideration to the idea that anybody would want to serve in government for life.

They probably didn't think a lot about life spans, technology, diet, education, etc. I doubt they considered that better-educated, wealthier men who would be on federal benches would have corresponding longer lifespans. To the Framers, living 20 years longer than average probably gave them the notion that a Supreme Court appointment was good for about two decades, more or less.

Now, we know differently. A 50 year-old person ascending to the Supreme Court is quite likely to have a good 30 years in the position.

Far too long for anybody's benefit.

We need a Constitutional limit on service on federal benches of either: a retirement age of 65, or; 2 successive terms of 7 years, or; a total 10-15 year term of office on any single federal bench, including the Supreme Court.

As I found while researching this prior post on the topic, the increasing lifespans of lifetime-appointed Supreme Court jurists has resulted in increasingly-rancorous fighting over the rarer vacancies.

The 22nd amendment set presidential term limits. But, of course, being a self-dealing body, Congress has conveniently neglected to finish the job for its own branch and the judicial branch, as well.

Let's begin with term limits on federal judicial appointments.