• Did I support my position convincingly?
• Which of the points make the most sense to u?
• Any other opinions u may have

 

I have created both of these and would like feedback to better my understanding the topic is lifetime or term sentences for judges

Transcribed Image Text:

My initial thought was that term limits should be set, after a brief review of the module. I feel that this would encourage positive change for the supreme court and continue to move forward in reconstructing the criminal justice system. However, it is important to discuss that with term limits comes added stress for the justices which could cause distraction when making life changing, and historical, decisions on a case. Further, if a decision were to be made that was not well thought out due to stress, this could be brought forth in similar future cases creating other concerns within out criminal justice system. Understanding how a Supreme Court Justice establishes their role is important to note. The President of the United States, their staff, and other government officials select a candidate and provide their name for nomination to the Senate. "In addition, since the 1950s, the American Bar Association (ABA) has rated nominees for federal judgeships. Whether a judicial nominee has been rated "well qualified," "qualified," or "not qualified" is considered by the Judiciary Committee. (ABA ratings and related materials can be viewed on the Internet at https://www.americanbar.org/groups/committees/federal judiciary/ratings.html.)" (Hemmens et al., 2021) I believe that this is a very important and influential piece of information in regard to my opinion on lifetime appointments. Considering the support and ratings from the ABA, in my opinion can assist in separating political bias and agenda from appointment of a Supreme Court Justice. I understand that having lifetime appointments can enforce consistency and provide knowledge and experience to cases that demand this attention. However, I am biased when it comes to individuals taking the "lifetime" term literally, I do feel that there should be a cap on age. For perspective, a "life" sentence in prison consists of a minimum of 25 years, maybe the Supreme Court Justices' should be reevaluated for competency and devotion at the 25-year mark. Let's be real, who have you ever talked to that has said that they plan to work for the rest of their lives, if they are financially able to retire at 65. Respectfully, those individuals are sociopaths. I am joking, but I do not understand why anyone would genuinely want to work until their death. As an overview of my opinion, I agree with lifetime appointments. However, I do believe that there should be a certain "cap" on age for the justices. I think that this would also be fair to the Justices, by giving them the push to retire, because everyone deserves to retire at some point in their life. Resources Hemmens, C., Brody, D. C., & Spohn, C. (2021). Criminal Courts (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc. (US). https://mbsdirect. vitalsource.com/books/9781071833872 My initial thought was that term limits should be set, after a brief review of the module. I feel that this would encourage positive change for the supreme court and continue to move forward in reconstructing the criminal justice system. However, it is important to discuss that with term limits comes added stress for the justices which could cause distraction when making life changing, and historical, decisions on a case. Further, if a decision were to be made that was not well thought out due to stress, this could be brought forth in similar future cases creating other concerns within out criminal justice system. Understanding how a Supreme Court Justice establishes their role is important to note. The President of the United States, their staff, and other government officials select a candidate and provide their name for nomination to the Senate. "In addition, since the 1950s, the American Bar Association (ABA) has rated nominees for federal judgeships. Whether a judicial nominee has been rated "well qualified," "qualified," or "not qualified" is considered by the Judiciary Committee. (ABA ratings and related materials can be viewed on the Internet at https://www.americanbar.org/groups/committees/federal judiciary/ratings.html.)" (Hemmens et al., 2021) I believe that this is a very important and influential piece of information in regard to my opinion on lifetime appointments. Considering the support and ratings from the ABA, in my opinion can assist in separating political bias and agenda from appointment of a Supreme Court Justice. I understand that having lifetime appointments can enforce consistency and provide knowledge and experience to cases that demand this attention. However, I am biased when it comes to individuals taking the "lifetime" term literally, I do feel that there should be a cap on age. For perspective, a "life" sentence in prison consists of a minimum of 25 years, maybe the Supreme Court Justices' should be reevaluated for competency and devotion at the 25-year mark. Let's be real, who have you ever talked to that has said that they plan to work for the rest of their lives, if they are financially able to retire at 65. Respectfully, those individuals are sociopaths. I am joking, but I do not understand why anyone would genuinely want to work until their death. As an overview of my opinion, I agree with lifetime appointments. However, I do believe that there should be a certain "cap" on age for the justices. I think that this would also be fair to the Justices, by giving them the push to retire, because everyone deserves to retire at some point in their life. Resources Hemmens, C., Brody, D. C., & Spohn, C. (2021). Criminal Courts (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc. (US). https://mbsdirect. vitalsource.com/books/9781071833872

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Youve presented a wellthoughtout argument regarding the lifetime appointments of Supreme Court Justices Here are some observations and feedback on your points Support for Position Term Limits You make ... View the full answer