Rick Perry and Fixing the Supreme Court

Rick Perry is gone from the Presidential race. He has gone home to Texas and is currently studying any and every possible list of three things he might be asked about in the future.

Still during his campaign among all of his blunders and mistakes Perry embraced one idea that is nothing short of brilliant.

Before 1970 the average tenure of a Supreme Court Justice was 15 years. Since that time tenure has almost doubled and with the ages of the current Supreme Court Justices that number will only go up.

The reasons for this are not hard to determine. The most prominent is that the Supreme Court has become highly politicized. The recent trend is to appoint the youngest justice one can so that with lifetime tenure the influence of that justice can be as long as possible.

In fact the most effective way of having a legacy for a current President might be in appointing justices that will extend his views through rulings for decades.

Most from both sides of the aisle admit George Bush the younger became President solely because of the makeup of the Supreme Court. Had one more justice been left leaning it is quite likely Al Gore would have been President.

What is the solution to this? Rick Perry has embraced a proposal that would set the maximum tenure for a Supreme Court Justice to be eighteen years. These terms would be staggered every two years so that every two years a Justice would be replaced.

The advantages are easy to see. While Republicans might like the makeup of the court now they surely know that in twenty years this might change. This would also mean that Justices would no longer hold onto a seat based on who the President is. It is widely known that Conservative Justices on the court will be jumping off the bench should Obama not gain reelection.

This also would allow no Supreme Court panel to extend an ideology over generations. It would allow each President to know that he would be placing two justices on the court. The battles that we see now in which we often seem to take the justices with the least experience and perhaps not the best experience might end. After all if each side knows that they will get a turn based on election the idea of filibustering qualified candidates seems ridiculous.

It would take a constitutional amendment, this would not be easy to accomplish. However a good idea from a bad source is still a good idea. Rick Perry should be commended and supported in this idea.