Lifetime appointment?

The death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia at age 79 should give us concern regarding the life expectancy of people accepting “lifetime” appointments. Life expectancy in general has been increasing over the past 200 years. My father (a pharmacist) once remarked “people are living longer because many diseases are no longer killing people at younger ages.” Bacterial and virus infections, as well as heart attacks, are not the same medical problems today compared to even 50 years ago. Organ and joint replacements are becoming even more common.

It is quite possible that changes in medicine could extend the lifespan of a person from today’s 80 to perhaps 150, or more, and in a body that appears equivalent to today’s 50 to 60. Do we want people appointed “for lifetime” that might then sit on the Supreme Court for 80 years or more? An analysis of the life expectancy of those on the Supreme Court since it was founded has shown that it has changed from 68 to 80.

We must change the United States Constitution before another justice is appointed to create a reasonable span of office. The Constitution set a minimum age of 35 for the president to assure minimal life experience. It would seem logical that the minimum age for a Supreme Court Justice should be 50, and retirement at the earlier of age 80 or 20 years of service. A 20-year term of office should provide good continuity, just as six years was considered good for senators.

Provision should be given that at least one justice is replaced every five years. If some event were to cause the simultaneous death of a majority of justices, then replacement must not create a block of justices that are replaced as a group. Ten justices have served, or are serving, for more than 30 years. Two of those took their oath of office prior to 1870. The average is now approximately 20 years.

Thomas Fancher

Moses Lake