The Founding Fathers gave the President the power to appoint Supreme Court justices (Error #1), and the appointments were for life (Error #2). The reasoning behind the life appointment was that without having to be concerned about re-appointment, the justices could be apolitical, impartial and make their decisions non-ideologically and purely on the law.
History has proven that reasoning flawed. The reverse has happened. Not having to worry about re-appointment, the justices feel free to be as political as hell, and they virtually always vote on the basis of their ideological biases. It makes for screaming headlines when, on rare occasions, they do not. Court onlookers predict the Court's ultimate ruling with a very high percentage of accuracy, even before the case begins.
The law is primarily based on fundamental principles expressed in the Constitution. To be sure, different justices may disagree on the application of those principles in a particular case...but the application is intended to be done objectively and logically.
What to do?
First, having the President, the chief political figure in the country, appoint the justices is patently absurd (and unConstitutional). It builds politics into the Court, even before the justices hear their first case. It clearly violates the separation of powers clause. The Constitution should be amended to have the justices appointed by groups outside the government and less likely to be politically motivated... like, perhaps, state bar associations.
Second, the term of service should not be for life but for, say, ten years. That is a sufficiently lengthy term for a justice to serve, and a not-too-lengthy term if the justice turns out to be incompetent and/or political (which, in a way, is but another form of incompetence). And one term only.
"and Justice for all" demands these changes.
,
No comments:
Post a Comment