Supreme Court Justices and Term Limits Benefits: Term limits, which restrict the number of terms an individual can serve in a particular elected office, offer several benefits. Term limits encourage turnover in political leadership, bringing new ideas, perspectives, and approaches to governance. This helps prevent stagnation and fosters innovation in policymaking and decision-making processes. Term limits prevent the concentration and entrenchment of power in the hands of individuals or political dynasties. By ensuring regular turnover in office, term limits promote a more dynamic and competitive political landscape, where no single individual or group can monopolize authority indefinitely. Term limits hold elected officials accountable to …show more content…
Term limits help mitigate the risk of corruption and nepotism by limiting the opportunity for entrenched incumbents to abuse their power or engage in self-serving behaviors. With regular turnover in office, there are fewer incentives for officials to prioritize their interests over those of the public, thus promoting greater integrity and transparency in governance. Drawbacks: The absence of term limits in political offices can lead to several drawbacks. Without term limits, incumbents can amass significant power and influence over time, potentially becoming entrenched in their positions. This can hinder the turnover of leadership and impede the entry of fresh perspectives and new ideas into governance. Long-serving incumbents may become less accountable to their constituents, as they no longer face the prospect of regular reelection. This can lead to complacency, reduced responsiveness to public concerns, and a lack of incentives to prioritize the needs of the electorate. Without term limits, political dynasties and family succession can become more prevalent, perpetuating concentrations of power and reducing opportunities for political diversity and merit-based
Preventing federal judges to serve for life is a good concept, except when the judges become too old to continue presiding. Setting term limits for judges would be a great idea, because it would add diversity to the court systems every time a new judge arrives. Some judges are just too old, and senile, to still rule on cases and do their job effectively; therefore, setting term limits would ultimately benefit the courts because it would allow for diversity, and a new judge who may have different standards.
"Elections, especially of representatives and counselors, should be annual, there not being in the whole circle of the sciences a maxim more infallible than this, 'where annual elections end, there slavery begins.' These great men . . . should be [chosen] once a year — Like bubbles on the sea of matter bourn, they rise, they break, and to the sea return. This will teach them the great political virtues of humility, patience, and moderation, without which every man in power becomes a ravenous beast of prey." —John Adams
The Honorable Jonathan Yates, former deputy general counsel for the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight of the U. S. House of Representatives, writes, “This lifetime term now enjoyed by justices not only contravenes the spirit of the Constitution, it counters the role intended for the court as a minor player in the equal judiciary branch of government. Term limits are needed to adjust the part of the court to the intent of the founding fathers” (Np). Judge Yates explains that the greatest powers of the Supreme Court did not originate from the Constitution or Congress, but from their own rulings (Np). The most prominent of which, was being Marbury v. Madison, in which the court granted itself judicial review, or the power to determine the constitutionality of legislation (Yates). Furthermore, the intended role of the court by the founding fathers was so small, that it did not have a home, or meet to hear any cases (Yates). An amendment to the Constitution removing the lifetime tenure of U.S. Supreme Court judges needs consideration by Congress. Lifetime tenure on the U.S. Supreme Court has led to four points that could not have been foreseen by the creators of the Constitution. The first problem resulting from the Supreme Court’s tenure policy is that judges’ are holding on to their seats, disregarding debilitating health issues. The second issue that has arisen from lifetime tenure is the use of strategic retirement by sitting judges to ensure a like-minded replacement. The third development resulting from lifetime tenure is the steady decrease in case decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court. The fourth and final effect lifetime tenure has had on the Supreme Court is an increase in celebrity status of the judges, which has le...
The 22nd Amendment creates a lame duck and which stops abuse of power3. Presidents in their second term have been seen to usually suffer diminished power, particularly after the second midterm elections. This diminish of power creates a lame duck. The president becoming a lame duck, stops him from being able abuse of power. The 22nd Amendment also stops the country from being a monarchy. US. Senators and Congressmen don’t have term limits because their voices are balanced by opposing parties in their chambers, the presidency is different. The president has no similar
Term limits could increase the quality of the Supreme Court nominees. One of the driving factors behind a Supreme Court nominee is their age (Ringhand np). Individuals over 60 years of age are less likely to be appointed. This means presidents intentionally exclude a large number of highly qualified individuals from serving on our nation’s highest court (Ringhand np). Term limits resolve this problem. Furthermore, the threat of a justice’s cognitive decline may be reduced, since there would no longer be a temptation to hold out for a strategically timed retirement.
Their long term in office liberates judges from partisan burdens and inhibits attacks on judicial power by the executive and legislative branch. Independence gives the judicial branch the ability to guard the Constitution and the rights of the people against the legislature. That means that he believes that the judicial branch is less likely to abuse a person's as compared to the executive or legislative. He felt that judges should have independence from the sanction of the executive, legislature, and the individuals so they can satisfy the judicial qualities defined in the Constitution. The U.S. Constitution offers that federal judges are selected to life term thru good behavior, so the courts can remain independent from the other two
When the United States was founded, the theme behind the new government was to establish an efficient system without doling out too much power to any one person. The Founders intended to prevent a rebirth of tyranny, which they had just escaped by breaking away from England. However, when members of Congress such as Tom Foley, who served as a Representative from 1964 through 1995, and Jack Brooks, who served as a Representative from 1952 through 1994, remain in the legislative system for over forty years, it is evident that tyranny has not necessarily been eradicated from the United States (Vance, 1994, p. 429). Term limits are a necessity to uphold the Founders’ intentions, to prevent unfair advantages given to incumbents, and to allow a multitude of additional benefits.
Congressional terms have no limits. Controversy exists between those who think the terms should be limited and those who believe that terms should remain unlimited. The group that wants to limit the terms argues that the change will promote fresh ideas and reduce the possibility of decisions being made for self-interest. Those who oppose term limits believe that we would sacrifice both the stability and experience held by veteran politicians. They also point out that our election process allows the voter to limit terms, at their discretion. While experience and stability are important considerations, congressional terms should be limited to a maximum of two.
There are many potential benefits and disadvantages to electing judges to Texas’ highest courts. The decision to elect judges is an interesting one. On the positive side, the Texas Judges are always in tune with what is going on in Texas currently. It keeps faces fresh and forces them to make the decisions that the people want by way of laws rules and state morals. It also holds the party ideals that many Texans want accountable. This is one of the common complaints about the United States Supreme Court. The complaint is that many Supreme Court justices are out of touch with what the people want. That they are not held accountable for their findings within each court case. Texas aims to stop this with elections every six years. The downside to this election based court justices is the same answer as to the benefits. They are forced to be in tune with what Texans want which is not necessarily the best for all Texas citizens particularly minorities. Texas judges cannot make unpopular decisions and expect to keep their job. So even if it might be the “right” decision, it is not necessarily the decision the Texas courts might come
One important reason Americans want to limit terms of their elected representatives is because they are likely to blame what they observe as professional and almost permanent ruling elect of career politicians for a majority of the country’s ill. Supporters of term limits claim the advantages of incumbency are so overpowering that they instead decrease representative democracy and diminish the effectiveness of the government. “Since 1950, about 90% of all incumbents in the House have won the reelection. The 10% who do not return includes both retiring members and those defeated in reelection attempts.” (Term Limits) “Proponents term limits argue that elected officials in Washington eventually become estrang...
Though, it would be refreshing to elect an official who remained focused on the best interest of their constituent, the reality is, special interest groups hold the purse. We must set term limits to prevent corruption and give the new comer on the block a fighting
Our current justice system has stood the test of time and has not proved to fail as of yet. The basic purpose of lifetime appointment is to assure the honesty of the power granted to Court Justices and protect them from political influence. Supreme Court Justices have life tenures unless they retire themselves, do something horrible enough to get impeached, or die in office. The Supreme Court justices should have life tenures because as current issues and court rulings- such as obamacare and same-sex marriage- are happening today, it is better to have older, unbiased, more experienced minds handle them.
It is not uncommon for the President to adapt his/her policy agenda to meet their personal time frame. Additionally, to remove a President from office requires a lengthy process. A successor will likely political legitimacy and may have their own agenda causing further discontinuity. On the other hand, Linz describes the fixed term for parliamentary leaders as stable because they can be removed from office easily and replaced seamlessly.
The longest serving member of Congress is Robert C. Byrd. He joined on January 3, 1959 and left office on June 28, 2010, he is the longest serving member of congress for serving 51 years 5 months and 26 days. He is one of many who have served over 25 years in Congress. The president has a term limit because we don’t want the same person to be able to control the United States because then nothing will change and we will only get the views of that one person. But in Congress you are allowed to run as many times as you want and if you keep winning you can stay in for life. I feel like Congress should have term limits.
It is not uncommon for the President to adapt his/her policy agenda to meet their personal time frame. Additionally, to remove a President from office requires a lengthy process. A successor will likely political legitimacy and may have their own agenda causing further discontinuity. On the other hand, Linz describes the fixed term for parliamentary leaders as stable because they can be removed from office easily and replaced seamlessly.