I cannot believe it if it isn't required.

I'd vote for that.

well, I guess that eliminates Kanye.... 😟

cuz he didn't pay his felon dues?

There are no official qualifications for becoming a Supreme Court justice.
The Constitution spells out age, citizenship and residency requirements for becoming president of the United States or a member of Congress but mentions no rules for joining the nation’s highest court. To date, six justices have been foreign born; the most recent, Felix Frankfurter, who served on the court from 1939 to 1962, was a native of Vienna, Austria. The youngest associate justice ever appointed was Joseph Story, who was 32 years old when he joined the bench in 1811. Associate Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., who served from 1902 to 1932, retired at age 90, making him the oldest person ever to sit on the court. One thing every justice who’s served shares in common is that all were lawyers prior to joining the court. During the 18th and 19th centuries, before attending law school was standard practice, many future justices got their legal training by studying under a mentor. James Byrnes, who served on the court from 1941 to 1942, was the last justice who didn’t attend law school (Byrnes, who also didn’t graduate from high school, worked as a law clerk and later passed the bar exam.) Harvard has produced more members of the court than any other law school; to date, 20 justices have attended or graduated from the venerable institution, which was established in 1817 and is America’s oldest continually operating law school.

I heard you can’t be Catholic to be on the Supreme Court

Robert it was rhetorical for me just wanted to get that out there, not playing “gotcha!” or anything personal. You generally have reasoned opinions.

this may be a positive change...the current system can encourage an ineffective and possibly incompetent judge to cling to a seat for extended lengths of time, weakening the court's ability to render it's best judgement of a case...

are they not subject to possible impeachment trials?

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/16/politics/scotus-impeach/index.html 

Same as POTUS (cliff notes)

Preemptive answer #2:

https://www.history.com/news/has-a-u-s-supreme-court-justice-ever-been-impeached 

Impeaching a supreme court justice would be a ****** move.

I shall await Pelosi’s filing.

Term limits for congress first, to see how it works, then move on to the s-court.
But without life it will be subject to political corruption eventually.

that is the argument for lifetime appointments...

It’s one of her “arrows” LHD

It's to know the consequences, before you make a change. Prudence and wisdom.🤔

None of this would be an issue had Ginsberg retired while Obama had been in office, she refused to do so. Was it possibly believed Clinton would be elected or did she really think she could outlast her health issues if Trump took office. The gamble she took is her fault, otherwise a leftist judge would have been appointed. Four years ago the republicans held the senate and they blocked a nomination by majority, the democrats do not have that privilege at this time so the nomination will go forward.

Ginsburg said she always wanted to work until she wasn't capable of doing the job anymore. That's what she did. And to do otherwise would be playing politics according to her, something she wanted to avoid..

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden is remaining silent on whether he supports a move by many progressives to expand the number of justices on the Supreme Court if the Democrats win back the White House and take control of the Senate in November’s elections.


Asked Thursday by reporters if he supports such a move, Biden once again refused to answer, saying “you’ll know my position on court-packing the day after the election.”


gotta elect him to find out what's in him..... 😟