Tuesday, September 11, 2007 7:28 AM
In reaction to a recent New York Times article (New Focus on the Effects of Life Tenure) on the subject, the Wall Street Journal Law Blog wonders Should Supreme Court Justices Have Life Tenure?
After outlining a number of the facts that The NYTimes author Linda Greenhouse reports in her article, the WSJ Law Blog's post notes that [m]ost other countries and 49 states (save Rhode Island) don’t grant life tenure to justices on their high courts. Why should the United States?
As the post also notes, this debate remains limited to inside the ivory tower (and law blogs!), but it is an interesting intellectual exercise nonetheless. I found both the article and post worth reading and hope they do spur some further debate across the blawgosphere, no matter which view people take. Links are above.