An Argument Of The Supreme Court

1109 Words5 Pages
The purpose of this research is to rationalize an amendment to the Constitution of the United States forcing Supreme Court Justices into a medical review to determine if the Justices are physically and mentally able to continue to serve their tenure. The focus is to create a half way point between two opinions in the very controversial subject of the Supreme Court Justices tenure. As the Judicial Branch becomes more active, citizens have questioned the rationale of justices serving for life, while others maintain that there is no need for change. The middle ground purposed is the establishment of a medical review of the justices and the hard part is establishing when they are medically unfit to serve. Considering the Constitutional purpose…show more content…
The Act created the Supreme Court and the lower court system. The check in power for the President on the judiciary is the ability to appoint the judges to their seat, typically the judge shares the views of the president that appointed them. The rest of Article III, Section I points to how judges can serve stating, “shall hold Offices during good behavior.” The good behavior portion of the statement is constitutionally recognized that judges may serve to the end of their life time or leave office voluntarily. Over time the meaning of life time has expanded and become the center of the controversy surrounding the extent of service. The framers of the constitution found life tenure appropriate for the justices of the Supreme Court as an expression of their importance to the government, but also that the loss of their cognitive ability was an imaginary farce. Currently, the lifetime appointment is to hold the integrity of the power granted to the court, to protect judges from interference on decisions that effect the other branches of government. Keeping the Supreme Court separate from the other branches upholds the integrity of the courts constitutional opinion. Alexander Hamilton described it as “that independent spirit in the judges.” It is important to understand this under the original
Get Access