Assignment 4- Debating the Constitution

Shylene Mejia

Class: POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

Assignment 4- Debating the Constitution

          The assigned reading for 10/3/15 week is “Another Stab at the Constitution,” published by The New York Times (NYT’s) on July 8, 2012. This article is a compilation of ten University professor providing their opinion regarding what they will suggest to change in the constitution. In this discussion, I will further analyze Jamal Greene, professor of law at Columbia Law School, position regarding setting term limits for Federal Judges. 

           In the NYT’s article one of the compilation “Revisiting the Constitution: We Need Term Limits for Federal Judges”,  Greene states:

 “In a democracy, no one person should wield so much power for so long. Article III of the Constitution provides that federal judges ‘shall hold their offices during good behaviour.’ In practice this language means they serve for life absent voluntary retirement or impeachment. Were we to draft the Constitution today, we would be wise to reconsider this provision.” 

I am in agreement with Greene’s observation, regarding limiting judges to a set number of years in office either by mandating a retirement age or an 18 year term assignment as suggested in the reading. I agree with this amendment change due to the lack of choices if the judge is not doing a satisfactory job. For example, if a judge is doing a non satisfactory job in the majority public opinion, then there is very little the public or those in office can do unless the judges commits ‘bad behavior’. The term ‘bad behavior’ is up for different translation that may not be in concern with the way he/she may be interpreting the law. Let’s take for instance the same sex marriage debate, which was decided by the US supreme court who mandated for all states to recognize same-sex marriage. If the US Supreme Court would have decided otherwise and other decision  were maintained very conservative, then a citizen or public officials would have to wait till the judges begin to retire before potential change can happen in the courts jurisdiction. 

            I choose this part of the article to review due to my interest with the differences between federal and state judiciary courts. As the federal and state courts handle different matters and the judges are elected differently. As for the State court judges are chosen in a number of ways either by election or appointment for a given number of years/ life or a combination of both. In conclusion, the term limit for judges can provide potential awareness of public opinion in the court room decisions which can entice the populations to be aware of who is in office and if they should go or stay.  

Reference

Comparing Federal & State Courts. (n.d.). Retrieved October 8, 2015, from            http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure/comparing-federal-state-courts

Greene, J. (2012, July 8). Revisiting the Constitution: We Need Term Limits for Federal Judges.                  The New York Times. Retrieved October 6, 2015 from   http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/07/08/another-stab-at-the-us-constitution/revisiting-the-constitution-we-need-term-limits-for-federal-judges

MOSENDZ, P. (2015, September 4). Why Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis Can't Be Fired for Refusing                 to Issue Same-Sex Marriage Licenses. Newsweek. Retrieved October 8, 2015 from http://www.newsweek.com/why-kim-davis-cant-be-fired-marriage-licenses-368902