Question of the Day - December 9

[Angela Cunningham]

Should Supreme Court justices be appointed for life? Explain your reasoning.

[defel]

No cause it would be unfair to the president he may have different people in mind fr the poistion then agian the people he picks me be payed to have things go his way so I would ay yes and no cause there are lots of possbiltes that could happen.

[Angela Cunningham]

Good start. Relate your answer to democratic principles. Does a lifetime appointment support limited government? Why or why not?

[mecro]

Yes,because they would be guaranteed a job for life.And wouldn't have to look for a new job unless they got kicked off.

[Angela Cunningham]

But is it good for democracy?

[cosmi]

I believe that Supreme Court justices shouldn't be appointed for life because maybe there is other people that have skills that can help but they would not have the chance to if the Supreme Court Justices were appointed for life. Also I believe that in some cases that they should be appointed for life because maybe the president approves of them.

[Angela Cunningham]

Good start. Relate your answer to democratic principles. Does a lifetime appointment support limited government? Why or why not?

[comel]

I dont think they should be appionted to life.
I think this because i think that other people should get a chance to to be court Justices. If we appointed them for life, they would all get old and we would have to replace them all at once. We need new people with fresher ideas.

[hucam]

no, because they will sonn get old and probably not be able to make good decisions for our country.

[vimar]

I think that supreme justices should be appointed for life because the supreme court is the most important. And so there for the members appointed should stay. Unless they are unfit for that position and should be removed. A new one should be voted for or selected and take the place of the unfit one.