Sure. One of the justices could sue and the other 8 find that it doesn’t apply to them.
Regardless of this tangent hypothetical, I honestly don’t think it should even attempt to apply to them.
I think it must apply to them.
Creating two classes of SCOTUS justices sounds extremely problematic.
1 Like
Not sure why not. Is there a good reason or just a gut reaction?
They got lifetime appointments. I think it’s fine to stop issuing new lifetime appointments, but it seems wrong to retroactively change the terms of appointments already made and confirmed. That’s over and done with.
I would add that a judge with a lifetime appointment to a federal court who was then appointed to an 18 year term in the SCOTUS should be able to return to his/her lifetime appointment as a federal judge upon completion of their term on the SCOTUS.
Yeah I think that would be more than fair, and would probably require a constitutional amendment if that were no the case.
I think you’d need a constitutional amendment either way, actually. Isn’t the lifetime appointment spelled out in the Constitution?
I’d be fine with them returning to a non-SCOTUS role. I think Whiskey brings up the obvious issue of having 2 distinct categories of justice. Much clearer to just level the playing field from the get-go imo.
1 Like
He stated it’s problematic, without saying why. I’m not sure why it’s so problematic that we should renege on the terms of their appointments.
Their votes would count the same.
In Britain the House of Lords has a mix of Lords with hereditary lifetime seats and Lords with specific terms, and it seems to work. (Maybe most of the lifetime hereditary seats are gone now… been a while since I read up on it, but certainly in the 21st century there still existed some hereditary seats.)
I’m sure the first time a termed justice hits the end of their term and is forced out while there remain some justices sitting on their lifetime appointments there will be some bad feelings. I don’t see that as sufficient reason to change the status of the existing justices.
And BTW, I don’t particularly like ANY of the existing justices, so I don’t say this out of any desire to see any of them on the bench for as long as possible. I just think it’s the right thing to do.
“This Hot Summer Is One of the Coolest of the Rest of Our Lives” - scientific american article.
1 Like
It is a La Nina, so the hot summer is expected in the US.
Yes. That’s not the point. It’s just a way of framing global warming. Which is, depending on how you’re averaging, what we consider a now hot summer will be a normal summer.
Just as (depending on how you average) what we considered a hot summer in the 80’s is a normal summer now.
I’m just thinking I won’t have to move south when I’m old. It will be nice in Louisville during the winter. Seems like non coastal area of our country that has runoff from the Appalachian Mountains is going to be the place to be for the future. Places like Louisville won’t run out of water and won’t be under water. It seems we almost might become a tropical type climate.
I think? It would take a lot to make KY tropical, but yeah, agreed it’s basically the perfect future place, unless you’ll miss the snow.
1 Like
Wow - that photo and my short comment must have really touched a nerve that you’re reposting it over 2 weeks later.
Thanks for posting the 80+ year comparison photo with your other photo. It pre-emptively cleared up any confusion about the comparison you’re trying to construct. Nobody will think these guys below were at a Trump rally.
