THE SUPREME COURT By T.S. Khanna, October 14, 2020.

 

FOUNDATION FOR BETTER GOVERNMENT,

 

 

 

 

The Supreme Court

By T.S.Khanna, October 14, 2020,

Foundation For Better Government.

 

To fill a vacancy at the Supreme Court, under the US Constitution, the President nominates a candidate who must be approved by the Senate.  The Constitution also requires judges to be independent and free of politics to keep the judiciary as independent coequal branch of the government.

 

A review of the Senate approval process of the last few years shows that no matter how independent and free of politics the candidate may be the rough treatment by the Senate is bound to leave a permanent imprint on the approved candidate’s mind, pushing him/her against one party or the other.

 

Lifetime appointment of judges is another setback to the Supreme Court as an institution.  Judges with health and incompetence issues continue to occupy the bench.  They do not permit freshening of the Supreme Court as it becomes necessary.

 

By convention, the Supreme Court has the powers to review and overrule the political decisions taken by the President or the Congress.  Since the judges are not involved in politics, their judgment on political decisions must not be relied upon.  This practice is not required by the Constitution, it being carried on only by convention.

 

There are nine justices on the bench for a long time.  Workload relationship with the number of justices required has never been questioned.  Given the long recesses of the Supreme Court, it is doubtful that the justices are overworked.

 

In view of the above discussion, it is recommended:

1.     To fill a vacancy at the Court, a panel of Supreme Court justices may nominate a candidate for the Senate approval.  The President may be relieved of this responsibility.  That will eliminate the play of party politics;

2.     Justices may be appointed to the Supreme Court for a ten-year term, with mandatory retirement of all justices at age seventy;

3.     The Supreme Court powers of judicial review of political decisions by the President and the Congress may be curtailed for political expediency benefiting the American citizens;

4.     The number judges on the bench may respond to the workload.  Political parties may not be allowed to play court “packing see-saw”.

  IIImplementing these recommendations would involve amending the US Constitution, which is almost as hard as amending religious scriptures, no matter how drastically outdated.