What the fuck were the founding fathers thinking when they made supreme court justices an appointed position for life?

Is there anything Jow Forums doesn't hate these days?

They wanted long-term stability in Judicial decision-making processes. It's not to say one is right and one is wrong, but that drastic movements one way or another isn't good for society. It's one of the same reasons the elections system we have now is so fucking frustrating. The founding fathers knew that people make decisions based upon emotion, and when public pressure is applied, that factor increases. A justice isn't someone who should be worried about losing his position based upon public pressure.

Justice actually existed at the time. Serving for decades in the position is a relatively new phenomenon, just like how they don't even have to do their jobs anymore or even prove they're alive.

Yearly mental evaluations should be mandatory.

The ridiculous idea of an ethnostate?

The idea is that the law is beholden to no one. Not the voters, not the president, not congress unless they can change it through the proper process.

This is not true. Justices might lean toward a particular way of thinking politically, but no party can influence them because they're untouchable. The idea is that with a secure position, they will at least keep their integrity intact even if their opinions are biased.

They also never thought the US would have so many Jews or grant africans the right to vote.
Reminder that the U.S.A was founded as a white nationalist union.

I don't think Ginsberg is even alive anymore

Their opininions arn't biast they are fucking wrong
It's a god damn amendment and It's text is very clear
These people are saying 3+1 is 5 and that's what their (((interperetation))) of the Bill of rights is

You're an idiot. How about you point to a specific case they've actually ruled on, and point out the argument you have a problem with. I guarantee even the worst one is still rooted in more legal knowledge than you'll ever have.

how is stonetoss reddit?

can you point out the part where it says that or how the supreme court was intended to function?

>The idea is that with a secure position, they will at least keep their integrity intact even if their opinions are biased.
Shouldn't it be the opposite? If your position is secure, why "preserve your integrity" when you're at no risk at getting voted out?
Obviously this holds for politicians so why is SCOTUS different?

You can still be impeached for actual wrongdoing. But the whims of the voters won't influence you into going against your educated opinion.

The idea of our system being how it is now was totally unheard of. Our system is basically "Team A" vs "Team B", in which "Team A" want to legitimately destroy the country and "Team B" wants to keep the country half destroyed. The courts were supposed to be impartial because there work IS supposed to be impartial. But it's been (((politicized)))

They were thinking about actually being a nation of elites in all but name. The presidential elections were always meant to be a farce to make common people think that it was a democracy. We are in reality a republic, a nation led by elites who wanted to be kings instead of answering to a king, and always have been. Senate and house terms are lengthy and judicial positions are held for a lifetime because thats where the real power lies. House and Senate having unlimited terms of six and two years and supreme court justices serving a lifetime was always meant to be a feature of the system, not a bug. I repeat, presidential elections are just meant to keep the average layperson thinking all is well.

You take an oath to the law and the people who founded this country had an innate leaning toward doing the right thing - having a secure position meant you can act Judiciously regardless of interest groups. We're now starting to see the problems in this with cynical, ideological, subversive actors in the system who blatantly rule against the law.

I read his books as a kid. Any propaganda in them?

Attached: 1481639787429.gif (420x315, 382K)

And electing them or making their appointments temporary would fix that?

They were all white american petriots

They need to be replaced by AI demigod cyborgs

they didn't have the same means of life support back then. the odds of some guy being half dead for years was pretty low back then. I'm sure it could happen but today it's almost normal. go look in a retirement home sometime, they all have wings in them filled with people mostly dead, but somehow living.

Plus the intent was to be the connecting line from the past to the present.

we all need to be replaced by those

>What the fuck were the founding fathers thinking when they made supreme court justices an appointed position for life?
Thomas Jefferson told the Supreme Court to fuck off.
Then Jackson followed a few decades later.

Dumbass. Supreme court was intended to always be slightly more conservative than the country at any given time. Slow rudder.
They don't want some AOC reactionaries fucking up the country, changing the rules every 4 years. They don't want a bunch of impulsive little faggots running around like crazy.
They wanted slow moving, slow thinking, old guys - who would only change shit if they knew damn well that it was a good idea.

They wanted Ents, basically

Attached: 300-Win-Mag-vs-300-Norma-Mag-vs-338-Lapua-Mag.jpg (871x651, 148K)

This. Our entire government is configured in a manner that allows you to ignore it. Just fucking do it anyways. The rationalization was they'd be too busy squabbling with one another that nobody would wind up with too much power.

>Our entire government is configured in a manner that allows you to ignore it
That's the thing people don't realize.
The court can't do shit. They have no enforcement powers.
Justice Marshall of Jefferson's own Virginia said one thing.
Jefferson said fuck off and did what he wanted.

Everyone died at 50 or earlier back then, these 90 year olds are a new thing for the most part. They should boot you at 70.

The way it works when judges start getting too senile to to their jobs is the other judges convince them to retire.

They didn't have toime to think of everything for you. They had slaves to fuck.
You got an Amendable Constitution, use it.

With that in mind, wouldnt draining the swamp be a terrible idea then?