Universal health care, 100% financial support once you reach federal retirement age, and you are legally required to retire from any federal position once you reach the social security retirement age. You can go do private industry stuff, but no federal jobs.
Private industry stuff
This is how you get lots of lobbyists.
You know they can just do that now right?
Yeah? And they clearly do? Why change the law just to continue allowing it?
Because we’re discussing trying to pass a law to keep geriatrics out of important, decision making positions?
Because we’re not trying to discuss a law preventing lobbying from former federal employees?
Like… are you mentally well or do you just not understand that your point about lobbying just simply does not follow/ is independent of the idea that we shouldn’t have geriatric federal employees?
You added the addendum, I noted what the consequences of that addendum would be. Moving straight into ad hominem attacks because you don’t like what I’m saying is pretty much not lit, fam.
Its a legitimate question as to your wellness. Its often a part of cognitive tests to see if people can make reasonable and logical conclusions and follow chains of reason. Its a sign of a lack of wellness if you can’t do that.
I hate it, here.
Because we’re discussing trying to pass a law to keep geriatrics out of important, decision making positions?
Those ‘geriatrics’ often have the wisdom that younger judges lack.
I would like to see a group of judges in charge of evaluating judges’ rulings when it becomes apparent that they are being led by something other than the law in their decisions.
What wisdom would a 97-year old have that no 64-year old would have? And why would that wisdom outweigh the decline in mental faculties that comes along with being of such an advanced age?
I dunno. I’m not 97. But I am in my mid 60’s and what I do know is my wisdom has grown immensely since I was 40. So who’s to say that can’t happen for someone in their 90’s?
I will add that I am not specifically supporting this judge’s argument (that she’s fine) because she is clearly putting out ruling that are not based on the law. But neither is SCOTUS, and for very different reasons.
I would still prefer a tribunal-type scenario that has the authority to investigate and remove judges based on facts, not just age.
Not so fun fact:
Reagan appointed the first judge directly to the federal circuit court…
And she’s still fucking sitting there at 97 years old
At 97, Newman is the oldest judge on the federal bench. She was appointed in 1984 by President Ronald Reagan and was the first judge appointed directly to the Federal Circuit.
Maybe we should cap it at like 100?
I mean. Ideally way younger, but it’s insane there’s no cap at all for a lifetime appointment.
Since the Supreme Court is full of Originalists now, let’s think the way the farmers would have thought. When they wrote “lifetime appointments” into the Constitution, the average life expectancy for a male child at birth was 35 years. But that counts a lot of infant and child deaths, not to mention deaths due to military service. A man who managed to make it to 50 years old in 1789 would probably have at least 21 years left. Source
So, all lifetime appointments should be forced to retire at 71, because that’s how long a lifetime appointment in 1789 would have lasted. Hey, Clarence, will you go along with my thorough analysis if I give you a “gratuity” afterwards?
Ok, let’s say 80.
“Yet the average lifespan of the 56 signers to the Declaration of Independence was 66 years, and a quarter of them (including Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Ben Franklin) lived to 80 or older.”
The average age of the signers, when they signed the DOI, was something like 26 or some really young age. Washington was practically venerable at like 40 or 45.
deleted by creator
I don’t think your example portrays originalism. They could have said “Until they reach the age of average life expectancy” then but instead went with life time appointments when in good behavior. A lifetime being serving until that judge dies, unless they’ve given up their seat.
To change lifetime appointments we’d need a constitutional amendment.
Your using logic and facts to drive your conclusions, though. You’re supposed to do it the other way around: start with your conclusion, and cherry-pick facts to reach it. Once you learn that, you, too can be a Conservate SC Justice!
Your example is actually much closer to Living Constitutionalism which based on this comment I’m going to assume you probably don’t want to be criticizing.
Originalism is tethered to textualism which is antithetical to your analogy reading words out of text.
FWIW judges in my Canadian province have mandatory retirement at age 75.
Newman was represented in the lawsuit by New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), a public-interest law firm linked to conservative backers that focuses on the so-called “administrative state.”
I doubt she appealed because she wanted to, she’s too old and confused to care imo. But plenty of conservatives have incentives to get this through the courts so they can have more precedents to keep the geriatric government going.
For years people passed on the torch when they got old, but this shitty boomer generation feel like they’re special
This is actually “silent” the generation ahead of boomers.
The boomers are refusing to take their turn, and refusing to allow any of us “kids” to step up and take on the responsibility for them. This particular “kid” is Gen X, and almost 44…
Wow, having to work untill you are 97?
Wow, that is horrific elder absuse!
Shame on you, USA, shame!
Nobody is forcing this lady to keep working.
That is kinda my point, this is self imposed elder abuse.
I expect she has a Wormtongue whispering in her ear the way Feinstein’s aides were calling the shots
People need to learn how to retire with dignity. Gtfo.
i can’t remember being Alzheimer so i am not // i can’t come up with the idea i am senile so i am not 🤪
