# Four justices of the SCOTUS are in their 70s . . . **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 10, 2012, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624 "2012-11-10T22:22:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Lantern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d26b3c/32.png) [@Lantern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lantern)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/21 "2012-11-11T19:42:07Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > I predict that by 2014, there’ll be a lot of pressure from his fellow Justices to call it quits. Actually I would guess that conservative justices will put pressure on him to hang on till a Republican president takes office. The US system of open-ended terms for SC justices is ridiculous. There should be a single non-renewable term of 12 years or so and probably also a retirement age of around 75. Allowing justices to pick when they retire is a terrible idea since it effectively allows them to pick their successor. And rising life expectancy is going to make things worse. Justices will routinely continue into their 80’s and even 90’s. This will raise the stakes for SC appointment battles since it will be common for justices to stay on for 30-40 years. At the same time greater ideological polarization will mean that some justices will hang on desperately if their party doesn’t come to power for a while. I wouldn’t be surprised if in the next 20 years you get a situation where a clearly unfit justice simply refuses to retire. And yes speculation about the life expectancy and health of justices, like on this thread, is distasteful but also inevitable given the current appointment system. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/22 "2012-11-11T20:11:16Z")
> [@Lantern](#): > > Allowing justices to pick when they retire is a terrible idea since it effectively allows them to pick their successor. No. Sandra Day O’Connor’s distaste for Alito is well-known, she wouldn’t have picked him in a million years. You might mean that they can influence the choice by putting it into the hands of a President who is most aligned with their ideology, but that’s not the same thing. Also, if you look at the Court starting with Stevens during the Ford Administration, a good number of justices have almost immediately betrayed the ideology of the President that nominated them. That said, the Court, as with any court, doesn’t like big changes. The retiring justice sensibly wants his replacement to maintain the balance. When it doesn’t happen that way we get the usual wringing of hands about how the court is overturning precedent and how can they do such an evil thing and blah-blah-blah, which is code for “they’re deciding in a way I don’t like”. ---
**Author:** ![etv78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d78d45/32.png) [@etv78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/etv78)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/23 "2012-11-11T20:11:38Z")
Any liberal Asian-American, or Native American candidates? ---
**Author:** ![Lantern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d26b3c/32.png) [@Lantern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lantern)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/24 "2012-11-11T21:20:01Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > You might mean that they can influence the choice by putting it into the hands of a President who is most aligned with their ideology, but that’s not the same thing. Also, if you look at the Court starting with Stevens during the Ford Administration, a good number of justices have almost immediately betrayed the ideology of the President that nominated them. ``` Sure that used to happen earlier but I suspect Souter will be the last surprise of that kind for a very long time. Certainly all the six justices since then have been fairly predictable and I doubt future picks will be any different. Today, when a justice retires they have a clear idea of what type of justice will replace them. And probably all of them have a clear party preference as well. O'Connor was perhaps the last justice who wouldn't have minded too much if a President of the other party got to nominate her successor. ``` ---
**Author:** ![drastic\_quench](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e36b37/32.png) [@drastic\_quench](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drastic_quench)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/25 "2012-11-11T22:00:28Z")
> [@etv78](#): > > Any liberal Asian-American, or Native American candidates? [Michael Burrage - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Burrage) He was a Clinton nominee for federal judge. If a Democrat wins in 2016, I would not be surprised to see President Obama nominated. There’s precedent, and it fits with his scholarly Constitution qualifications. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/26 "2012-11-11T22:14:50Z")
> [@Lantern](#): > > . . . The US system of open-ended terms for SC justices is ridiculous. There should be a single non-renewable term of 12 years or so . . . This simply shifts vast amounts of power back to the President and the Senate. It reduces the independence and impartiality of the court, which is already heavily open to influence (as this thread indicates.) You want to have these confirmation fights in the Senate more often? Sweet Jesus, no! ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/27 "2012-11-11T22:23:57Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Two would be my guess - probably Ginsburg and Scalia. Scalia just seems to be losing it upstairs. He’s already become a bit of an embarrassment to the Court, and that’s only going to get worse. I predict that by 2014, there’ll be a lot of pressure from his fellow Justices to call it quits. I would be amazed if Scalia retires before 2016. Forget about him being in the normal decline for a man of his age. I’m betting he’s filed a living will that says that if his heart stops beating during a Democratic administration he wants to be hooked up to machines until the next Republican is elected. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2012, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/28 "2012-11-11T22:36:04Z")
> [@drastic\_quench](#): > > [Michael Burrage - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Burrage) > > He was a Clinton nominee for federal judge. > > If a Democrat wins in 2016, I would not be surprised to see President Obama nominated. There’s precedent, and it fits with his scholarly Constitution qualifications. He wouldn’t accept. Why on earth would he want to pigeonhole himself in that position for the rest of the next 25 or so years? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/29 "2012-11-12T00:57:35Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > He wouldn’t accept. Why on earth would he want to pigeonhole himself in that position for the rest of the next 25 or so years? I think he would take it. He’s a constitutional scholar so he’d be interested in the job. And I don’t think Obama is really looking forward to ending his career at 55. But the reality is Taft was a fluke. Former presidents no longer go on to active political careers. They’re relegated to “elder statesman” status. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/30 "2012-11-12T01:42:08Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I think he would take it. He’s a constitutional scholar so he’d be interested in the job. And I don’t think Obama is really looking forward to ending his career at 55. > > But the reality is Taft was a fluke. Former presidents no longer go on to active political careers. They’re relegated to “elder statesman” status. So, you think he would take it but the reality is he wouldn’t take it? ---
**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/31 "2012-11-12T01:43:54Z")
Taft had been a judge for years and years, and had been approached to be a supreme court justice before he was nominated and won the presidency. Obama has never been a judge. How much courtroom experience does Obama even have? He’d be an insane pick (in a WTF? sense), but not nearly as insane as Harriet Meyers. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/32 "2012-11-12T01:52:07Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > So, you think he would take it but the reality is he wouldn’t take it? I think he would take it if it was offered but it won’t be offered. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/33 "2012-11-12T01:55:30Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I think he would take it if it was offered but it won’t be offered. OK, but I still can’t see why he would accept. He’d be stuck doing that for basically the rest of his active life. Sure, he taught constitutional law for a few years when he was young, but that doesn’t mean he wants to spend his waning years on the SCOTUS as a junior Justice to Roberts, fetching coffee for Alito and Scalia. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/34 "2012-11-12T02:25:09Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > OK, but I still can’t see why he would accept. He’d be stuck doing that for basically the rest of his active life. Sure, he taught constitutional law for a few years when he was young, but that doesn’t mean he wants to spend his waning years on the SCOTUS as a junior Justice to Roberts, fetching coffee for Alito and Scalia. Mainly because it would be the only opportunity he’d have to continue having an active life. Let’s face it, nobody falls into the Presidency. You have to have an almost insane level of drive and ambition to make it into the Oval Office. And you can’t just shut that off after your term is over. People who run for President want to be powerful and suddenly they’re being told at the peak of their career that they’ll never hold another position of power for the rest of their life - at most, they’ll have “influence”. (And in Obama’s case this will be magnified by the fact he’ll be put into retirement at a relatively early age.) Supreme Court Justice might not be as good as being President but it’s a position of real power. I think any ex-president would jump on the offer if it was made. Heck, most of them probably would run for Mayor of Mooseport if it came to that. ---
**Author:** ![Flyer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/flyer/32/7298_2.png) [@Flyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flyer)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/35 "2012-11-12T03:54:39Z")
> [@drewtwo99](#): > > Taft had been a judge for years and years, and had been approached to be a supreme court justice before he was nominated and won the presidency. Obama has never been a judge. How much courtroom experience does Obama even have? > > He’d be an insane pick (in a WTF? sense), but not nearly as insane as Harriet Meyers. You need to brush up on your history. Plenty of justices didn’t have any judicial experience. [http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme\_court/justices/nopriorexp.html](http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/justices/nopriorexp.html) [http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/supreme-court-nominee-could-be-1st-without-judic-1/nNCjj/](http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/supreme-court-nominee-could-be-1st-without-judic-1/nNCjj/) [http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2011964189\_apuskaganoconnor.html](http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2011964189_apuskaganoconnor.html) ---
**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/36 "2012-11-12T04:01:36Z")
> [@Flyer](#): > > You need to brush up on your history. Plenty of justices didn’t have any judicial experience. > > [http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme\_court/justices/nopriorexp.html](http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/justices/nopriorexp.html) > > [http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/supreme-court-nominee-could-be-1st-without-judic-1/nNCjj/](http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/supreme-court-nominee-could-be-1st-without-judic-1/nNCjj/) > > [http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2011964189\_apuskaganoconnor.html](http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2011964189_apuskaganoconnor.html) Did I say judicial experience? I said courtroom experience. Everyone on those lists had courtroom experience. Does Obama? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/37 "2012-11-12T05:00:09Z")
I’ll say three. I am guessing Ginsberg and Breyer will want Obama to name their successors, and I’ll guess that a third justice retires or dies, setting off a monumental confirmation fight. That should be fun. I don’t think Obama will ever become a Supreme Court justice. If a Democrat nominated him in the next term it wouldn’t sit right with a lot of people, I think. There’s nothing unconstitutional about it, but it’d be a quick turnaround and Congress and the public might not like it. It also runs counter to one of the recent trends in nominating justices: picking people with short track records that can’t be used against them. That won’t be true of a two-term president. And the other trend is picking younger justices who might stay on the court for 20 or 25 or 30 years. Obama will be 55 when he leaves office. There’s also the fact that presidents want to establish their own identities in office, and we’ve seen that play out over the years with Obama and Clinton. ---
**Author:** ![Lantern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d26b3c/32.png) [@Lantern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lantern)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/38 "2012-11-12T05:34:58Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > You want to have these confirmation fights in the Senate more often? Sweet Jesus, no! The point is that confirmation hearings will have lower stakes because of the fixed terms. You are not worried that a justice will sit on the court for 30+ years. The US is the only major democracy I know where SC appointments are so intensely political and contentious. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/39 "2012-11-12T05:55:52Z")
> [@drewtwo99](#): > > Did I say judicial experience? I said courtroom experience. Everyone on those lists had courtroom experience. Does Obama? He worked for a law firm for most of the 90’s. But he’s not going to get nominated for the SCOTUS. Even if he leaves the Whitehouse as a popular President, there isn’t really any upside for a future President to nominate him. ---
**Author:** ![drastic\_quench](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e36b37/32.png) [@drastic\_quench](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drastic_quench)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 6:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624/40 "2012-11-12T06:12:40Z")
> [@Simplicio](#): > > He worked for a law firm for most of the 90’s. > > But he’s not going to get nominated for the SCOTUS. Even if he leaves the Whitehouse as a popular President, there isn’t really any upside for a future President to nominate him. Quid pro quo, if Obama can get this unknown Democrat elected via early endorsement, vigorous campaigning, and access to his fundraising/networking machine. I’m not saying it’s likely at all, but I could see it happening IF that is something that would interest him. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/four-justices-of-the-scotus-are-in-their-70s/640624.md?page=3)