The United States constitution reigns supreme regarding all the laws that govern the United States. From the constitution, a world power emerged and provided a democratic model that many other countries continue to emulate to this day. The constitution vests the power to govern on the people themselves and they are free to choose whoever they feel is qualified enough to represent them. Judges act as custodians of the constitution. Through their service, they can ensure that people adhere to and respect the constitution. Despite their importance, there has been a huge debate that seeks to discuss whether or not it is right for them to serve for life as prescribed in the constitution. To come up with a definitive conclusion to the above discussion, it is important to analyze both the advantages and disadvantages of lifetime appointment for Supreme Court justices.
Many advantages come with lifetime judicial appointments. Foremost, it ensures the independence of the courts as the judges do not require re-election or re-appointment (Lyons, 2018). The lack of the need for re-election or re-appointment leads to honest verdicts as the judges do not owe favors to any parties. Such a provision also strengthens the judiciary’s ability to deliver accurate judgments due to the years of experience accumulated by judges. Due to the security that comes with lifetime judicial appointments, judges can offer final verdicts without being swayed by public opinion. Because the position held by judges cannot be threatened by public opinion, they are confident enough to offer the correct verdicts even if it goes against the expectations of many (Lyons, 2018). Furthermore, according to Lyons (2018), lifetime judicial appointments enable the judges to effectively handle difficult cases due to the years of experience that they have accumulated and the number of cases that they have presided over. It is evident that through the lifetime judicial appointment, the United States’ judiciary has evolved to be stronger and more independent over the years, regardless of the administration in place.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Despite the advantages presented by lifetime judicial appointments, many disadvantages come with it. One of the major drawbacks is that the judges might have different views which might be either harmful or helpful to various decisions. For example, there are times when ascertaining the legitimacy of a case, different views held by different judges can result in conclusions that are not complete (Drutman, 2018). Another demerit of lifelong judicial appointments takes a political dimension in that when Democratic presidents appoint judges; the judges are often viewed as being liberal in their interpretation of the law while judges appointed by Republican presidents are often considered to be too conservative (Callahan, 2018). Further, Callahan (2018) note that politicizing of the judiciary is dangerous as it may undermine its independence and credibility. Furthermore, the difference in opinion among various judges might affect the accurateness of the verdicts. It is a well-known fact that when a person gets older, their ability to carry out certain activities or functions diminishes. This also applies to Supreme Court judges as they may fail to serve the people as mandated by the constitution effectively. The disadvantages that come with a lifelong judicial appointment are a testament to the fact that more needs to be done to streamline the judiciary and how it carries out its operations.
With the debate about whether or not it is appropriate for judges to have lifelong appointments still raging on, I think that there should be term limits in place to enable them to serve a definite period. According to Callahan (2018), the country’s forefathers granted the judiciary lifelong appointments with the main purpose of preventing them from being influenced politically. However, concerning the current events, it is evident that there are loopholes that can convert the judiciary into a political tool. Donald Trump’s second Supreme Court nomination threatens to tilt the court in conservatives’ favor for many years. Additionally, it is high time that the country changes the lifetime judicial appointment policy due to the increased life expectancy rate in the United States. I, therefore, believe that there should be an introduction of term limits due to the changing environment that we live in today.
The lifetime judicial appointment policy enables Supreme Court judges to serve in their capacity for an indefinite period until a time when they decide to retire. The constitution has given judges lifetime appointments. Several advantages and disadvantages come with lifelong judicial appointments. Some of the benefits include the strengthening and promotion of the courts' independence, the offering of final verdicts without being swayed by public opinion, and the effective handling of difficult cases. The disadvantages that come with lifelong judicial appointments include the difference in opinions or views among the judges which might affect the outcome of cases and the political dimension that the judiciary may take.
References
Callahan M. (2018). Why do Supreme Court justices have lifetime appointments? News@Northeastern. Retrieved from https://news.northeastern.edu/2018/09/21/why-do-supreme-court-justices-have-lifetime-appointments/
Drutman L. (2018, June 27). It’s time for term limits for Supreme Court justices. Vox https://www.vox.com/polyarchy/2018/6/27/17511030/supreme-court-term-limits-retirement
Lyons D. (2018, July 10). 7 Pros & Cons of Supreme Court Justice Term Limits for You to Consider. Bustle. Retrieved from https://www.bustle.com/p/7-pros-cons-of-supreme-court-justice-term-limits-for-you-to-consider-9713408
