Der Abgeordnete Olszewski will das ROBE-Gesetz einführen, um Amtszeitbeschränkungen für Richter des Obersten Gerichtshofs festzulegen

    https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/johnny-olszewski-robe-act-establish-term-limits-supreme-court-justices

    Share.

    24 Kommentare

    1. ElderSmackJack on

      Love this in concept, but I’m pretty sure this would need to be handled via Constitutional Amendment, making this exercise purely performative.

      Edit: I see that it’s an Amendment after opening the link. Leaving my original up as a monument to my shame.

    2. Zealousideal_Look275 on

      It’s a step in the right direction, but it’s only one of many steps needed 

    3. Too long. 10 years is plenty.

      Either way, it’s a good idea and absolutely the right thing to do. Which of course means it has no chance.

    4. as much as i say yes, we also need to see this staggered. if the act passes, and 3-4 judges get knocked out now, jump just gets to re-pick for all of them. then you have an unprecedented situation where 1 man build the entire court. best to stagger this so outside of death or retirement, terms are up in 4 year gaps. no president could pick more than 2 judges in an 8 year term without a sitting judge either dieing or retiring as well.

    5. lateformyfuneral on

      What’s even the point of publishing these headlines. It goes nowhere because, essentially, both parties need to agree and possibly a Constitutional amendment as currently they are guaranteed a life term.

      Biden also announced a proposal for 18 year term limit on justices, and a fixed two justices appointed in every Presidential term, thus creating a conveyor belt of judges and predictable changes in the court’s composition based on Presidential elections. While it’s a good proposal, proposing it is the easy part.

    6. YoungestDonkey on

      Won’t pass, and if it does it will be ruled unconstitutional (by SCOTUS).

      How about raising the number of justices to three dozens? Then every case is heard by a random selection of 5, 7 or 9 justices with possible but rare appeal to a larger random group of 11 or 13 (like, if the initial ruling was too close and the court agrees to appeal itself). This makes it much, much harder for one president to stack it or for one justice to exert undue influence for years to come. And the court can handle more cases faster. And it’s constitutional for Congress to set the number of justices.

    7. GravyMcBiscuits on

      The entire idea behind the Supreme Court is one of the most fundamentally bad designs in the Constitution.

      1. The entire premise that there is some group of people who should be treated as more inherently noble and objective than the rest of us is … shaky as hell
      2. The premise that an organization (federal US in this instance) can be trusted to regulate itself is laughable.
      3. Totally failed to take into account the power/influence of political parties.

    8. I think a thorough background check is required prior to and while serving. No political affiliations, no corporate affiliations, no religious affiliation, no vested interest should be seen to make you compromised. It should be able to disqualify you immediately and also have you removed.

      Justice is blind for a reason.

    9. Remember that the founders also wanted our constitution to be a living document to updated and changed because they knew itd be needed

      Yea me neither

    10. Heliosvector on

      It is sorely needed. The usa currently has one justice, Clarence Thomas who was sworn in to the position 35 years ago. He is now basically making decisions for generations that he has no connection to.

    11. GotSomeUpdogOnUrFace on

      Here’s a cute idea, cut with the stupid fucking names and the dumbass advertising and pass some fucking laws. Oh wait you can’t pass any laws because your party leaders decided to be worthless fucking pieces of shit and tell us who we were going to vote for when that’s not what we wanted and lost all the elections to the fascists.

    12. Needs to go further. Expand the court to 18 members, so every year 1 is appointed. And impeach/force out Roberts, Alito and Thomas. And make every case heard by a rotating and random subset of them.

      Should be doable since all official acts of a president are above the law.

    13. Haven’t seen the full amendment, but better than term limits would be:

      -Get rid of shadow docket shenanigans

      -Move to 13 justices, one for each appeals district

      -Have 7 justices, randomly chosen, sit for any case. Takes away the temptation for corps to pump a bunch of money into a justice if there’s no guarantee that they’ll sit for your case.

      -Create an independent committee to rule on motions to dismiss SC justices from a case for conflict of interest. Especially with only using half for any case, it should make it much more of a viable option to remove justices who have any ties through acquaintances, former employment etc from that particular case.

    14. realparkingbrake on

      A good idea. Now do Congress and the presidency/vice presidency, nobody over 65 can hold those offices.

    Leave A Reply