What to do about the Supreme Court?

[white_wolf]

Does anyone else find the SCOTUS to be rather undemocratic. The justices are appointed for political reasons and not elected. They are appointed for life. And unlike the Congress their sessions aren't broadcast. It all seems very secretive and undemocratic. So if you could make changes to the system what would they be?

[Sgent]

1. I pretty much think the founders had it right

and would leave it like it is.

If I were to make any change, I might have them appointed to 10-20 year terms, with no chance of reappointment, but that's about it. I like the fact that Article III judges are independent of direct control by the electorate.

[CreekDog]

4. Perhaps, but the founders got things wrong

like the non proportional representation in the Senate.

[notesdev]

6. There's a reason for that

smaller pop states have no reason to join the union if they are simply going to be outvoted on everything by larger population states

[Warren DeMontague]

8. Unfortunately, though, now we have 33 million Californians subject to the moral whims

of 400,000 Wyoming Residents.

When the Federal Government wasn't in a position to tell citizens, say, what sorts of plants they could smoke, maybe the "protect the interests of the smaller pop. states" argument made sense. But now you have a situation where not only is the Federal Government skewed far more socially conservative than the majority of the population, but with the filibuster being the new standard by which anything gets done, a VERY small slice of the population is holding the rest of us back. And hostage.

[notesdev]

10. That's the fault

of everyone who erroneously insists that the "general welfare" and "interstate commerce" clauses give the feds free reign to do whatever the hell it pleases them to do.

Under the actual law of the land - not like anyone follows it, of course - the federal government has no legitimate role in anything that is not specifically enumerated in Article I, Section 8, excepting only where later Amendments add to this list.

Mind you, people in Wyoming are even more subject to the moral whims of Californians than vice versa, as Wyoming barely has any representation at all in the House and very few electoral votes.

With proportional representation, smaller pop states become nothing more than colonies of larger pop states and they would be better off independent.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. I agree, that's kind of what I was saying too.

As far as the Senate goes, I also don't expect anything will be done about it. But it's worth pointing out, particularly now when 40 Senators can hold up the entire US Government.

[notesdev]

12. The 40 Senators thing is unconstitutional

The Senate may be able to write its own internal rules, but they have no authority to fundamentally change our form of government, which is what going from majority rule to minority veto does. This practice should have been abolished long ago.

[Warren DeMontague]

7. When the courts- particularly, say, the SCOTUS, are doing their job, they protect against the worst

excesses of majority rule. Think the Brown, Lawrence, McCollum, Griswold decisions, etc.

[Warren DeMontague]

2. The powers are separated for a reason. Several reasons, in fact. Which make sense.

The truly 'undemocratic' institution is the United States Senate, which gives something like 60 times more weight to the vote of a voter in Wyoming than it does to one in California.

But, again, these are things written deeply into the fabric of our nation, and we futz with them at our peril.

The GOP should not be permitted to demand 60 Senate votes to get anything done in the government, however.

[OmahaBlueDog]

3. I've said for a long time that I'd like term limits

24 years (four senate terms, or 6 presidential terms) strikes me as enough. As it stands now, rather than trying to get the best, or most experienced legal minds, you instead try to get someone inbetween their mid-40s to early 50's in hopes thay you'll get 30+ years out of them. 24 years strikes me as a fair limit.

I'd also like to end the fillibuster option, and instead make SCOTUS approval contingent on obtaining a 3/5 majority. I know a lot of people won't like that, but I think that's the best way to ensure not getting extremists at either end of the political spectrum.

[Warpy]

5. I'd put in a retirement age after so many years on the bench, say 20

so that the plutocracy couldn't poison the court by flooding it with incompetent men in their 40s. Another thing I'd do is establish a set of guidelines for impeaching those found corrupt or senile.

[Skittles]

9. get Scalia and his pet Clarence Thomas off the court

they have no business being on the Supreme Court

[Ter]

13. We're not a democracy

So what's so unusual?

[sandnsea]

14. oyez.org

All kinds of information, including audio of court cases. If people are interested, they can know what's going on.

http://www.oyez.org/