Back in the early 1990s, when congressional term limits were such a hot issue, it helped the GOP end the Democrats' 40-year House of Representatives majority. Democrats and the left castigated term limits as a threat to the democratic process and were just a nefarious Republican plot to gain power.
Term limits faded from the spotlight once the Supreme Court held that states could not limit their own delegations' terms in office. The justice who wrote the dissenting opinion in that case: Clarence Thomas.
Who now finds himself a case study among some on the left of the need for term limits…on Supreme Court justices. The reason: Thomas' ethical lapses have exposed the problem that comes when any official holds power for too long:
Few government jobs anywhere in the world are quite like that of U.S. Supreme Court justices: nine unelected people who dictate wide swaths of national policy. And if they're put on the Court at a young age, they get to do so for many decades with no real risk of removal. Only one justice has ever been impeached (Samuel Chase in 1804). None has ever been convicted. Supreme Court justices are, in this way, more akin to royalty than public servants. Only a single U.S. state mirrors the federal system — the rest have either fixed terms or mandatory retirement.
That's right out of the old congressional term limits rhetorical playbook. It was right in the 1990s when the subject was members of Congress who began to see their offices as a species of property and not a public trust. And it's right today when the subject is Supreme Court justices who have sat on the bench well past their sell-by date.
It's good, then to welcome our friends on the left to the term limits issue. It never was about enshrining one faction over another, It was always about rotation in office. John Adams wrote that the principle was essential for curbing the natural tendency of officials to abuse their power:
These great men, in this respect, should be, once a year
“Like bubbles on the sea of matter borne, They rise, they break, and to that sea return.”
This will teach them the great political virtues of humility, patience, and moderation, without which every man in power becomes a ravenous beast of prey.
Adams was talking about annual elections of members of legislatures and state councils. But let's be generous, as the proponents of Supreme Court term limits have suggested, and say that 18 years is enough for anyone to be a justice.
That would solve a few problems – including the spectacle of justices clinging to their seats even as their health deteriorates. It also means Congress is unlikely to act because doing so would only turn the spotlight on its members and the crying need to send them home after a few years, too.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.
READ NEXT: ‘High Bio-Hazard Risk' From Lab Seized By Fighters In Sudan
Unclear, is this writer saying he thinks Thomas should go because of ethics problems …or something???
Norman wants Thomas to go because he’s conservative and it would allow Biden to put another far left judge on the Supreme Court.
I guess because Thomas knows a rich guy.
its a typical tactic from the dems playbook. they did breyer that way. they are doing it too feinstein. they badger the person until they resign.. then they replace them with a selected radical.
To Clean the Swamp Out:
Term Limits
Reduce Federal positions
Merge like positions
Update testing
Make Mgrs accountable
Fire at Will clause OK
Cut waste
Cut admin
Sounds like a lot of stuff that Trump would like to do.
No wonder all the deep state, all the Democrats, and all the RINOs don’t want him back as president.
Leftists were “notoriously” silent on this issue during the 27 SCOTUS years of RBG.