 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
kring
|
 |
Wichita,KS,USA
Dec 2001 time: 23:20
|
|
I don't think it would be fair to require justices to give up their party alliance(s). By the same token, if a justice was voting based on said alliances in direct violation of the Constitution, impeachment would be necessary if the person didn't willing step down.
How would you define politically active? Is expressing my opinions (whether or not they agree/disagree with one or more parties politically active).
I also would hope that the justices will be chosen to be rubber stampers for the President (regardless of the President's political party, if any).
My one concern is the no term limits for justices. If you want more people to experience leadership, then I would urge term limits. Lack of term limits can cause problems. In my area, we vote to keep/not keep the state supreme court justices individually, but I don't think anyone has ever been kicked out by the vote.
quote: Length of Office Terms:
All office terms shall last one month. A member can run for a different office at the end of his term, but he cannot change offices during it. If a member is elected three times into the same office, that member must run for a different office in his fourth term, or not run at all.
|
We would need to change this part of our Constitution since it does say ALL office terms and TERM limits, and to me justices are an office. Or, we would need to change Amendment III's wording. As well as modifying the impeachment section immediately following.
Also, the court should have no more power than granted by the Constitution as decided by the people in their votes.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20. Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|